# Does Growth Mindset Actually Work

Growth mindset theory posits that human abilities and intelligence can be developed through strategic effort, a concept that originally showed massive promise in early psychological studies. However, recent large-scale replications and meta-analyses reveal that universal interventions yield tiny average improvements, shifting the scientific consensus toward highly targeted approaches. Today, researchers agree that while a growth mindset is not a universal cure-all, it can meaningfully boost academic achievement for at-risk students when supported by the right environmental conditions and systemic classroom practices.

## The Origins of Mindset Theory and Attribution

The concept of the "growth mindset" emerged from decades of research on motivation, developmental psychology, and attribution theory, spearheaded by Stanford psychologist Carol Dweck and her colleagues. Originally termed "implicit theories of intelligence," Dweck's framework was developed to explain why some students thrive when facing adversity while others, of equal innate ability, languish and give up [cite: 1, 2]. 

To understand this phenomenon, researchers identified that individuals generally hold one of two core, implicit beliefs about the nature of their cognitive abilities and human potential [cite: 1, 3].

Those who hold an **entity theory**—popularly known as a "fixed mindset"—believe that intelligence is a static, innate trait. In this worldview, you are either born smart or you are not, and your baseline talents are essentially locked in place. Consequently, individuals with a fixed mindset tend to view academic or professional challenges as existential threats that might expose their lack of natural ability. To protect their ego and maintain the appearance of being "smart," they frequently avoid difficult tasks, display defensiveness when corrected, and give up easily when facing setbacks [cite: 4, 5]. 

Conversely, those who hold an **incremental theory**—a "growth mindset"—believe that intelligence is a malleable quality that can be cultivated through dedication, effective strategies, and help-seeking. Because they do not view their current cognitive limitations as a permanent reflection of their worth, these individuals are significantly more likely to embrace challenges. They interpret failures not as indictments of their identity, but as actionable feedback and necessary friction on the path to mastery [cite: 6, 7].

### The Role of Neuroscience and Neuroplasticity

As the psychological theory developed, it found an ideal metaphorical companion in the emerging field of neuroscience, specifically the concept of neuroplasticity. Growth mindset interventions frequently rely on teaching students that the brain is not a static organ, but rather functions much like a muscle [cite: 8]. 

When individuals confront new challenges, practice difficult ways of thinking, and push beyond their comfort zones, they actively forge and strengthen neural pathways. This biological reality provides a concrete, scientific foundation for the psychological interventions. By teaching students about neural plasticity, researchers aim to shift their internal narratives, transforming academic struggles from a sign of inherent stupidity into a biological process of the brain literally "growing smarter" [cite: 9, 10].

## The Landmark Studies That Built the Empire

To understand how these mindsets translate into tangible behavioral outcomes, early researchers focused heavily on childhood development, specifically examining how children are praised by adults and how adolescents navigate highly stressful transitions in their educational careers. Two landmark studies established the foundation for what would become a global educational movement.

### The 1998 Praise Study: Intelligence vs. Effort

One of the most foundational and frequently cited papers in the growth mindset literature is Claudia Mueller and Carol Dweck’s 1998 study, *Praise for Intelligence Can Undermine Children's Motivation and Performance* [cite: 11]. 

Conducted during the height of the 1990s "self-esteem movement"—a pedagogical era which posited that praising a child's innate abilities would boost their confidence and subsequent performance—this study sought to empirically prove the exact opposite [cite: 12, 13]. Mueller and Dweck hypothesized that praising abilities such as intelligence could actually evoke a fragile performance-goal orientation, leading children to avoid challenges out of fear of invalidating their "smart" label [cite: 12].

To test this, the researchers conducted a series of six experimental studies using fifth-grade students. The methodology followed a distinct, carefully controlled three-round design:

**Round 1: The Baseline Success**
In the first phase, students were presented with ten moderately difficult puzzles from the Raven's Standard Progressive Matrices, a well-known cognitive assessment tool. Because the exercises were calibrated to be relatively simple for their age group, almost all the children scored well and experienced initial success [cite: 12, 14]. 

**Round 2: The Praise Manipulation**
Following their success, the students were randomly assigned to receive different types of verbal feedback from the experimenters:
*   **Intelligence Praise:** One group was praised for their innate ability ("That's a really good score. You must be smart at these problems") [cite: 12, 15].
*   **Effort Praise:** Another group was praised for their process and hard work ("That's a really good score. You must have worked hard at these problems") [cite: 15, 16].
*   **Control Group:** A third group received neutral, non-directed informational feedback regarding their score without any attribution to either intelligence or effort [cite: 15].

**Round 3: The Setback and Behavioral Choice**
Students were then given a much more difficult set of puzzles where they invariably struggled and experienced failure. Following this induced setback, the researchers measured several behavioral and psychological variables, including the students' task enjoyment, their persistence, and their attributions for why they failed. Finally, the students were offered a choice: they could either return to easier puzzles (indicating a performance goal aimed at looking smart) or try new, challenging puzzles from which they could learn (indicating a learning goal) [cite: 16, 17].

#### Results of the Praise Manipulation

The results of the 1998 study were stark and fundamentally challenged prevailing educational dogma. An overwhelming 92% of the effort-praised students chose the more challenging puzzles, eager to continue learning. In sharp contrast, only 33% of the intelligence-praised students opted for the tougher puzzles, preferring the safety of the easier tasks to protect their ego [cite: 16]. 

When faced with failure, the students praised for their intelligence experienced a sharp decline in task enjoyment, demonstrated significantly less persistence, and were highly likely to attribute their struggles to a permanent lack of innate ability [cite: 11, 13]. Conversely, the effort-praised students maintained their enjoyment of the tasks, persisted longer in the face of difficulty, and attributed their failures to a lack of effort—a variable entirely within their own control [cite: 15, 17]. 

### The 2007 Transition Study: Altering Academic Trajectories

If Mueller and Dweck (1998) established the mechanism of mindset formation in a laboratory setting, Blackwell, Trzesniewski, and Dweck (2007) established its long-term academic impact in the real world. This highly influential two-part study tracked early adolescents navigating the notoriously difficult transition from elementary school to junior high school, a period characterized by shifting societal demands, increasingly complex social relations, and new, rigorous educational expectations [cite: 3, 18].

**Study 1: Longitudinal Observation**
In the first part of the study, researchers tracked 373 seventh graders over two full academic years. The sample was highly diverse in ethnicity and socioeconomic status, with 53% of participants eligible for free lunch, and featured students with average sixth-grade math test scores at the 75th percentile nationally [cite: 3]. The researchers found that students who entered junior high with a pre-existing growth mindset exhibited a steady, upward trajectory in their math grades across the two years. In contrast, those who held a fixed mindset showed a flat or declining trajectory, despite both groups entering the seventh grade with equivalent prior math achievement [cite: 3, 19]. 

**Study 2: The Intervention**
Study 2 moved from observation to active intervention. The researchers took a subset of 91 seventh graders and randomly assigned them to either a control group (N = 43) or an experimental group (N = 48) [cite: 20, 21]. Both groups received an eight-session workshop. The control group received instruction strictly on useful study skills and memory techniques. The experimental group, however, received the study skills combined with explicit instruction on the malleability of intelligence, specifically learning about neuroplasticity and how learning physically changes the brain [cite: 19, 22]. 

The psychological intervention yielded significant real-world results. While the control group's math grades continued to follow a downward trajectory—a typical trend for students struggling with the junior high transition—this academic decline was successfully reversed for the experimental group [cite: 20, 21]. Teachers, who were entirely blind to which students were in the experimental versus the control group, identified three times as many students in the mindset intervention group as showing marked, positive changes in their classroom motivation [cite: 19, 22].

This study solidified the belief among educators that brief, targeted psychological interventions could fundamentally alter a student's long-term academic trajectory, sparking a massive demand for growth mindset curricula.

## Scaling the Mindset: Classrooms to Boardrooms

Following the publication of Carol Dweck’s seminal 2006 mass-market book, *Mindset: The New Psychology of Success*, the concept exploded beyond the confines of academic developmental psychology. It quickly became a cultural phenomenon. 

An entire cottage industry of non-profit organizations and for-profit educational technology companies emerged to distribute mindset interventions, consulting services, and specialized curricula to schools globally [cite: 9, 23]. The federal government invested millions of taxpayer dollars into mindset research, including significant grants from the Institute of Education Sciences to evaluate commercially available interventions like *Brainology*, a program sold to major districts like the District of Columbia Public Schools for thousands of dollars [cite: 9]. 

However, the appeal of the growth mindset was not limited to the education sector. It soon permeated the corporate world, becoming a cornerstone of executive coaching, organizational behavior management, and corporate cultural turnarounds.

### The Microsoft Corporate Transformation

Nowhere was the corporate adoption of growth mindset more prominent, deliberate, or financially successful than at Microsoft under the leadership of CEO Satya Nadella. 

When Nadella took the helm of the tech giant in 2014, Microsoft was widely perceived by industry analysts as a lumbering, legacy software company that had missed key shifts in mobile and cloud computing [cite: 24, 25]. Internally, the company was suffering from a notoriously toxic and fragmented corporate culture. Teams operated in highly competitive silos, characterized by a "know-it-all" mentality where employees felt they had to constantly prove their innate intelligence, leading to a profound fear of failure that stifled innovation [cite: 24, 26].

Heavily inspired by Dweck's research, Nadella initiated a sweeping cultural transformation to pivot the entire global workforce toward a "learn-it-all" mentality [cite: 26, 27]. The growth mindset philosophy was embedded into the very fabric of the organization's human resources and management ethos; it was printed on employee badges, discussed in monthly videos produced by the CEO, and became the central metric for leadership evaluation [cite: 25, 26]. 

Rather than punishing failure or rewarding only immediate success, the new culture encouraged employees to view challenges as necessary opportunities to learn. This psychological safety empowered teams to take calculated risks and promoted active, deep empathy to uncover the unarticulated needs of their customers [cite: 26, 27]. 

This massive psychological pivot was coupled with bold technological bets, primarily the aggressive shift of resources away from legacy businesses and toward cloud computing (Microsoft Azure) [cite: 24, 28]. The dual strategy of cultural renewal and technological foresight yielded unprecedented financial results. Between 2014 and 2024, Microsoft's market value soared from roughly $300 billion to over $3 trillion, creating an estimated $2.8 trillion in shareholder wealth and allowing the company to frequently trade places with Apple as the world's most valuable publicly traded company [cite: 24, 28].

## The Danger of "False Growth Mindset" and Toxic Positivity

As the growth mindset concept scaled massively across schools and Fortune 500 companies, it was inevitably simplified, diluted, and frequently misunderstood, leading to widespread misapplication. The distortion became so prevalent that Dweck herself had to repeatedly intervene in the public discourse to address what she officially termed the **"false growth mindset"** [cite: 29]. 

In many educational and corporate settings, the nuanced psychological framework of the growth mindset was incorrectly reduced to an empty platitude equating merely to pure effort, flexibility, or boundless optimism [cite: 30]. 

### Rewarding Wheel-Spinning

One of the most common manifestations of the false growth mindset is the blind praising of sheer effort, even when that effort yields absolutely no results. Teachers and managers began praising hard work without accompanying that praise with a demand for strategic adjustment [cite: 6, 31]. 

If a student studies for five hours using an entirely ineffective method and fails an exam, simply telling them "I love how much effort you put in" is a false application of the theory. Genuine growth mindset thinking values effort only as a singular part of a broader process that must include deep reflection, the willingness to abandon failing strategies, and the humility to seek critical feedback and help from others [cite: 6, 30]. Rewarding brute-force effort without strategy effectively rewards wheel-spinning rather than genuine cognitive development.

### The Trap of Toxic Positivity

Furthermore, growth mindset rhetoric occasionally bled into the cultural phenomenon of **toxic positivity**—the assumption that one should maintain a relentlessly positive outlook despite systemic barriers, severe emotional distress, or repeated, painful failures [cite: 32]. 

In this distorted view, individuals are told they can simply "think positive thoughts" to change their reality, ignoring the genuine pain of failure or the reality of biological and systemic limitations [cite: 32]. However, genuine growth mindset thinking is not about ignoring reality or adopting a falsely cheerful disposition; it requires acknowledging difficulties honestly and diagnosing failures accurately [cite: 6, 33]. Believing that one can achieve a pure, permanent growth mindset is an unreasonable fallacy; psychology recognizes that everyone is actually a complex, evolving mixture of fixed and growth mindsets, and different contexts will trigger different responses [cite: 30, 34].

### A Comparison of Mindset Paradigms

To clarify the core tenets of the scientific theory versus its common cultural misconceptions, the following table summarizes the key distinctions between a fixed mindset, a genuine growth mindset, and the false growth mindset:

| Attribute | Fixed Mindset (Entity Theory) | Genuine Growth Mindset (Incremental Theory) | False Growth Mindset (Toxic/Misconception) |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Core Belief** | Intelligence and talent are static, innate traits given at birth. [cite: 4, 35] | Abilities can be developed over time through strategic effort and input. [cite: 6, 35] | Claiming to have a growth mindset simply by being open-minded, flexible, or positive. [cite: 30] |
| **View of Failure** | Failure is a devastating reflection of a permanent lack of ability. [cite: 5, 12] | Failure is a source of critical data used to adjust and optimize future strategies. [cite: 6, 33] | Failure is ignored; the focus is solely on praising the effort ("At least you tried!"). [cite: 6, 30] |
| **Response to Challenge** | Avoids challenges to prevent exposing perceived intellectual flaws. [cite: 4, 35] | Embraces challenges as necessary friction required for cognitive growth. [cite: 19, 33] | Brute-forces challenges with the same ineffective strategies while expecting different results. [cite: 6] |
| **Attribution of Success** | Success is attributed primarily to genetic lotteries or natural talent. [cite: 12, 17] | Success is attributed to process, resilience, adaptability, and seeking help. [cite: 17, 19] | Success is attributed purely to willpower, manifestation, and optimism. [cite: 30, 32] |

## The Replication Backlash and Meta-Analytic Crisis

As governments, school districts, and federal agencies continued to pour resources into mindset programs, the broader psychological sciences were undergoing a systemic "replication crisis." Independent researchers began subjecting Dweck's foundational claims to rigorous, large-scale scrutiny, seeking to verify if the dramatic results seen in early studies held up outside the original laboratories [cite: 9]. 

The resulting wave of replication attempts and comprehensive meta-analyses delivered what many in the media and academia considered a devastating blow to the theory, sparking a fierce backlash against the commercialization of mindset interventions.

### Failed International Replications 

Several high-profile attempts to replicate the dramatic results of the early mindset studies failed to find any statistically significant effects, calling the universality of the theory into question. 

For instance, in a 2019 study by Li and Bates, researchers attempted to replicate Mueller and Dweck's famous 1998 puzzle and praise study. They conducted three separate replication attempts across cohorts of 9-to-13-year-old Chinese children (N = 190, 222, and 211, respectively). They found that beliefs about the malleability of basic ability were not linked to resilience to failure or academic progress, completely failing to replicate the widely accepted praise-for-effort effect in this demographic [cite: 36]. 

Similarly, Glerum et al. (2019) conducted a study involving 108 vocational education (VET) students in the Netherlands, strictly mirroring the 1998 study's design. The researchers hypothesized that students praised for intelligence would choose performance goals and give up easily, while effort-praised students would choose learning goals. Instead, the results showed that both groups reacted in the exact same way. The type of praise administered had absolutely no significant influence on their post-failure task performance, attribution, or goal orientation [cite: 14, 17].

### The Macnamara & Burgoyne Meta-Analyses (2023)

The most severe, systematic academic criticism of growth mindset theory has been leveled by researchers Brooke Macnamara and Alexander Burgoyne. In a massive, highly publicized 2023 meta-analysis published in the journal *Psychological Bulletin*, they examined 63 independent studies comprising an enormous dataset of 97,672 total participants to strictly evaluate the impact of growth mindset interventions on academic achievement [cite: 37, 38].

The findings fundamentally challenged the entire mindset industry. Across all 63 studies, Macnamara and Burgoyne observed a "tiny" overall effect size of just *d* = 0.05. Even more damning, this already minuscule effect became statistically nonsignificant after the researchers applied mathematical corrections for potential publication bias (the tendency for academic journals to only publish successful experiments) [cite: 37, 38]. 

Beyond the small effect sizes, the meta-analysis uncovered severe methodological flaws pervasive throughout the growth mindset literature:
*   **Financial Conflicts of Interest:** The researchers found that study authors who had a direct financial incentive to report positive findings—such as those employed by companies that sell mindset interventions, or those who receive consulting fees—were two and a half times more likely to publish significantly larger effects than independent researchers with no financial stake [cite: 23, 39].
*   **Widespread Confounds and Poor Quality:** The review noted that an astounding 94% of the growth mindset interventions analyzed included methodological confounds [cite: 39]. When Macnamara and Burgoyne stripped away the flawed studies and isolated only the absolute highest-quality evidence (6 rigorous, pre-registered studies featuring 13,571 students), the effect size dropped to an entirely nonsignificant *d* = 0.02 [cite: 37, 38].
*   **Teacher Bias (Lack of Blinding):** In many of the analyzed studies, classroom teachers knew exactly which students had been assigned to receive the growth mindset intervention and which were in the control group. The researchers argued this lack of blinding could lead to subconscious grading biases or altered teacher-student interactions, artificially inflating the academic results of the experimental group [cite: 23].

Macnamara and Burgoyne firmly concluded that the apparent benefits of growth mindset interventions on academic achievement are highly likely to be spurious, driven primarily by inadequate study design, reporting flaws, and systemic researcher bias [cite: 37, 39]. They publicly suggested that the millions of taxpayer and district dollars spent on these psychological programs could be far better utilized by updating tangible class materials or making structural, systemic changes to underfunded schools [cite: 9, 23].

## The Statistical Debate: What Constitutes a "Meaningful" Effect?

To understand the core of the backlash and the defense of mindset theory, one must understand the statistical metric at the center of the debate: **Cohen's *d***. 

Cohen's *d* is a standardized measure of effect size that allows researchers to compare the magnitude of differences between two groups (e.g., an intervention group and a control group) regardless of the specific measurement scales used [cite: 40, 41]. It is calculated by dividing the difference between the two groups' means by their pooled standard deviation [cite: 42, 43]. 

In the behavioral and social sciences, there are traditional, widely accepted benchmarks for interpreting Cohen's *d*:
*   **Small Effect:** *d* = 0.20
*   **Medium Effect:** *d* = 0.50
*   **Large Effect:** *d* = 0.80 [cite: 40, 44]

When early landmark studies like Blackwell (2007) reported intervention effect sizes of *d* = 0.66, they were claiming a medium-to-large, highly visible impact on student grades [cite: 3]. However, as the meta-analyses dragged the average effect size down to 0.05 or 0.10, critics rightfully pointed out that this is half the size of what is traditionally considered a "small" effect [cite: 40]. An effect size of 0.08, for example, is roughly equivalent to a student raising their GPA by less than one-tenth of a single grade point [cite: 9].

### The Educational Economics Defense

Proponents of mindset theory, alongside educational economists, counter this criticism by arguing that interpreting an effect size in a vacuum without considering cost and scalability is statistically irresponsible. 

Susan Dynarski, a prominent educational economist, notes that an effect size of 0.10 is indeed tiny if the intervention requires hiring thousands of new teachers or rebuilding schools at massive expense. However, if the intervention is a 45-minute, fully automated online module that costs only a few dollars per student to administer, a 0.10 effect size at a national population scale is actually an incredibly potent return on investment [cite: 45, 46]. 

For example, a sweeping, multi-million-dollar structural intervention to reduce class sizes in Tennessee yielded an effect size of roughly 0.20 [cite: 46]. Therefore, achieving half that effect size for a fraction of a fraction of the cost makes mindset interventions highly attractive from a public policy and educational economics perspective, even if the absolute gains for an individual student appear modest [cite: 46, 47].

## The Nuance: Heterogeneity and "Mindset x Context"

If the Macnamara meta-analyses represented the prosecution of growth mindset theory, the defense mobilized around a different, highly nuanced statistical philosophy: the critical importance of *heterogeneity* (variation across different subgroups) and environmental context. 

Proponents of the theory argue that demanding a massive, uniform effect size across all students in all environments—treating a psychological mindset like a universal pharmaceutical drug—is a fundamentally flawed way to evaluate behavioral interventions [cite: 48]. Instead, they argue that growth mindset acts as a targeted catalyst that primarily works for specific vulnerable students situated within highly specific environments.

### The National Study of Learning Mindsets (NSLM)

To definitively address the intense criticisms regarding small sample sizes, publication bias, lack of pre-registration, and independent data collection, a massive consortium of interdisciplinary researchers launched the National Study of Learning Mindsets (NSLM). 

Published in the prestigious journal *Nature* in 2019, this rigorous study involved 12,490 ninth-graders randomly assigned across a nationally representative sample of 65 U.S. high schools [cite: 49, 50]. The intervention was brief, low-cost, and highly scalable: students simply completed two short online sessions (less than one hour total) designed to teach them that intellectual abilities can be developed through neural plasticity [cite: 10, 50].

The headline finding of the NSLM aligned somewhat with the critics: the average overall GPA improvement across the entire massive sample was roughly 0.10 grade points—an undeniably small average effect [cite: 49, 50]. However, the researchers demonstrated that this small average masked profound, highly meaningful heterogeneity across different subgroups [cite: 49].

**The Target Demographic: At-Risk Students**
For high-achieving students who were already well-prepared, earning high grades, and possessing robust study strategies, the mindset intervention had virtually zero effect on their GPA [cite: 18, 47]. Researchers suspect this is due to a natural ceiling effect; if a student is already earning an 'A', a mindset shift cannot push their grade higher. 

However, for **lower-achieving students** (those performing below their school's median), the brief intervention produced a statistically significant, robust, and highly cost-effective positive effect on core course GPAs [cite: 50, 51]. For a vulnerable student entering the 9th grade with a 2.0 GPA, this marginal behavioral boost was shown to significantly reduce the probability that they would end the year off-track for high school graduation [cite: 47]. 

Furthermore, the long-term impacts proved resilient. A 2024 follow-up study analyzing Wave 2 data from the NSLM (tracking 10,013 of the original students) found that adolescent growth mindset beliefs at the beginning of 9th grade accurately predicted actual enrollment in college four years later. Crucially, these predictive patterns were significantly stronger for adolescents coming from lower socioeconomic status (SES) backgrounds, indicating that the mindset acts as a vital protective factor for vulnerable youth [cite: 52].

### The "Mindset x Context" Framework

The most critical theoretical revelation to emerge from the NSLM and subsequent modern research is the **Mindset x Context framework**. Psychological interventions do not occur in a vacuum; they interact dynamically with the student's daily reality. 

The NSLM data clearly identified that the online intervention only successfully changed student grades when the specific school context—namely peer norms and teacher pedagogical practices—aligned with and supported the messages of the intervention [cite: 50]. 

If a student completes an online module telling them that their brain can grow through strategic effort, but then walks into a mathematics classroom where the teacher holds a rigid fixed mindset, grades strictly on a bell curve, and refuses to allow revisions on failed assignments, the psychological intervention will rapidly wither and die [cite: 31, 51]. The environment simply does not afford the opportunity to practice the mindset. Conversely, researchers found that when students' math teachers held relatively higher growth mindsets themselves and utilized supportive pedagogical practices, the treatment effects of the online intervention on the students' academic achievement were sustained and amplified [cite: 51, 52]. 

Dweck and her modern colleagues now readily concede that the "beliefs alone" hypothesis—the early, optimistic idea that simply teaching a student a growth mindset is enough to overcome a toxic or unsupportive environment—is false. To produce widespread, lasting change, student-facing interventions must be deeply coupled with structural training for teachers, creating classroom policies (the "affordances") that actually allow those resilient beliefs to take root and be rewarded [cite: 31].

### The Dueling Meta-Analyses (Macnamara vs. Burnette)

This nuanced, contextual defense of mindset theory is heavily supported by a competing 2023 meta-analysis conducted by Burnette et al. 

While Macnamara and Burgoyne utilized a traditional meta-analytic approach that aggregated overall "yes-or-no" effect sizes across entire populations, Burnette utilized a "heterogeneity-attuned" multi-level meta-regression designed specifically to look for effects within specific subgroups [cite: 48]. Burnette and her colleagues argued that asking a binary question about whether an intervention works across an entire diverse population obscures the reality of behavioral science [cite: 48]. 

When Burnette's team isolated studies with high implementation fidelity and focused strictly on the authors' intended "focal groups" (e.g., academically high-risk students, or low-SES populations), they found a highly significant, practical effect size of *d* = 0.14. For non-focal groups (e.g., wealthy, high-achieving students), the effect dropped to a negligible *d* = 0.04 [cite: 51, 53]. 

Strikingly, an exploratory re-analysis of Macnamara's exact dataset, but this time applying Burnette's modern, heterogeneity-attuned statistical methods, confirmed Burnette's conclusions: there is, in fact, a meaningful and statistically significant effect of growth mindset interventions, provided researchers look specifically at the at-risk groups the interventions are actually designed to help [cite: 48].

### Summary of the Shifting Scientific Consensus

To illustrate the trajectory of the replication crisis and the resulting statistical consensus, the table below maps how reported effect sizes have shifted from early laboratory enthusiasm to modern, targeted nuance:

| Study / Meta-Analysis | Key Finding (Effect Size) | Scientific Implication |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Original Blackwell Study (2007)** | *d* = 0.66 (Experimental vs Control) [cite: 3] | High-water mark of early claims; suggested mindset alone could massively reverse declining math trajectories. |
| **Macnamara & Burgoyne Meta-Analysis (2023)** | *d* = 0.05 (Overall); *d* = 0.02 (High Quality) [cite: 37] | Claims of universal efficacy are overstated; average population effects are negligible and plagued by bias. |
| **National Study (NSLM, 2019)** | ~0.10 GPA points (Overall average) [cite: 49] | Effects are small but highly cost-effective; interventions are highly potent specifically for low-achieving students. |
| **Burnette et al. Meta-Analysis (2023)** | *d* = 0.14 (At-risk focal groups) [cite: 51, 53] | Interventions are beneficial, but researchers must target vulnerable subgroups rather than testing population averages. |

## Global Evidence: Beyond Western Classrooms

A frequent and valid criticism of many foundational psychological theories is their over-reliance on WEIRD populations (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic). To determine if the growth mindset paradigm holds up globally, researchers and educational policymakers have turned to macro-level data from the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), administered by the OECD.

The 2018 and 2022 PISA assessments collected comprehensive survey and achievement data from hundreds of thousands of 15-year-old students across more than 70 countries [cite: 54, 55]. The results confirm that, on a macro level, mindsets do matter globally. Across 72 of the 74 participating developed nations, there was a consistent positive average correlation (approximately *r* = 0.20) between growth mindset beliefs and academic test scores [cite: 52]. Students who believed their intelligence could be developed generally exhibited higher reading, math, and science literacy, and reported significantly greater overall psychological well-being [cite: 2, 55].

However, the international data also starkly highlights the limits of the theory's universality. While behavioral interventions spearheaded by international organizations like the World Bank successfully replicated positive impacts on student effort and test scores in developing countries like Peru and Indonesia [cite: 56], the OECD reported that the predictive effects of growth mindsets were highly limited or non-existent among students in certain East Asian countries [cite: 54]. 

In these specific cultural contexts, the relationship between self-theories and achievement operates through vastly different, localized social and economic conditions. For instance, in highly rigid educational systems that rely entirely on high-stakes standardized testing for advancement, believing you can improve your intelligence matters very little if the systemic structure does not reward that specific type of cognitive resilience [cite: 54, 57]. This global data reinforces the modern scientific consensus: context entirely dictates the efficacy of the mindset.

## Bottom line

The scientific narrative surrounding growth mindset theory has evolved dramatically from uncritical, widespread enthusiasm to intense methodological skepticism, finally settling into a calibrated, context-dependent nuance. The rigorous replication backlash successfully proved that simply telling students their brains can grow will not magically transform their academic trajectories, and the early literature undoubtedly suffered from inflated effect sizes and commercial bias. However, robust modern evidence indicates that when highly scalable, low-cost growth mindset interventions are targeted specifically at vulnerable, lower-achieving populations—and critically, when they are supported by teachers and systemic norms that genuinely reward risk-taking and resilience—they yield reliable, cost-effective improvements in both grades and long-term educational attainment. 

## Sources
1. [Digital Commons WKU](https://digitalcommons.wku.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1788&context=stu_hon_theses)
2. [Natasha Kenny](https://natashakenny.ca/)
3. [Scholars Archive BYU](https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/context/ipt_projects/article/1073/viewcontent/Enhancing_Parental_Support_for_STEM_Students.pdf)
4. [ResearchGate: Swachh Bharat Abhiyan](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/373671124_Swachh_Bharat_Abhiyan_Myth_vs_Reality)
5. [Pure Spa Direct](https://purespadirect.com/blogs/pure-spa-direct-blog/the-hair-growth-suppression-myth-vs-reality-debunking-client-fears-building-your-waxing-empire)
6. [Atticus Li](https://atticusli.com/replication-crisis/growth-mindset/)
7. [ResearchGate: A national experiment reveals where a growth mindset improves achievement](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/335029154_A_national_experiment_reveals_where_a_growth_mindset_improves_achievement)
8. [Evidence Based Teaching](https://evidencebasedteaching.org/growth-mindset-vs-fixed-mindset/)
9. [HHS Purdue (jintelligence)](https://hhs.purdue.edu/skill-learning-and-performance-lab/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2024/08/jintelligence-11-00104-v2-2.pdf)
10. [EdWeek](https://www.edweek.org/leadership/national-study-bolsters-case-for-teaching-growth-mindset/2019/08)
11. [Forbes](https://www.forbes.com/sites/tomvanderark/2018/04/18/hit-refresh-how-a-growth-mindset-culture-tripled-microsofts-value/)
12. [Medium](https://medium.com/@dhakalsandeep38/the-story-of-satya-nadellas-transformation-of-microsoft-33738288230d)
13. [Super.so](https://assets.super.so/e12ed113-d92f-4131-88dc-3fe93f1581e2/files/ce76d351-361d-4bfc-b036-529f5ad1f6ee/Satya_Nadella_at_Microsoft_-_Instilling_a_growth_mindset.pdf)
14. [Economic Times](https://m.economictimes.com/tech/technology/microsoft-ceo-satya-nadella-caps-a-decade-of-change-and-tremendous-growth/articleshow/107385792.cms)
15. [Inc.](https://www.inc.com/nick-hobson/satya-nadellas-microsoft-just-became-most-valued-company-in-world-its-thanks-to-psychology-not-tech.html)
16. [Emma O'Brien Coach](https://emmaobriencoach.com/navigating-uncertainty-tips-for-a-resilient-mindset/)
17. [Mallory Musante](https://www.mallorymusante.com/blog/5-ways-to-keep-a-growth-mindset-in-times-of-uncertainty)
18. [MI Training](https://mitraining.edu.au/blog/developing-a-growth-mindset-a-practical-guide-for-the-workplace/)
19. [Franklin Covey](https://www.franklincovey.com/blog/workplace-growth-mindset/)
20. [Karen Allen](https://www.karenallen.co/post/navigate-career-uncertainty-with-a-growth-mindset)
21. [Progress Focused (Mueller & Dweck 1998)](https://www.progressfocused.com/2020/09/mueller-dweck-1998-classic-study.html)
22. [PubMed (9686450)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9686450/)
23. [Growth Mindset Maths](http://www.growthmindsetmaths.com/uploads/2/3/7/7/23776169/mindset_and_math_science_achievement_-_nov_2013.pdf)
24. [SCIRP (2079868)](https://www.scirp.org/reference/referencespapers?referenceid=2079868)
25. [ERIC (EJ1427934)](https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1427934.pdf)
26. [HHS Purdue (2023-90931-004)](https://hhs.purdue.edu/skill-learning-and-performance-lab/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2024/08/2023-90931-004.pdf)
27. [Case Western (Barnett-Macnamara)](https://artscimedia.case.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/141/2020/06/26110114/Barnett-Macnamara-2023.pdf)
28. [Case Western (News)](https://psychsciences.case.edu/2022/11/analysis-of-growth-mindset-research-suggests-little-to-no-positive-effect-on-student-performance/)
29. [PMC (8299535)](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8299535/)
30. [Reddit (slatestarcodex)](https://www.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/8vin09/carol_dweck_responds_to_recent_criticisms_of/)
31. [Lumen Learning](https://courses.lumenlearning.com/waymaker-psychology/chapter/psych-in-real-life-growth-mindsets/)
32. [Frontiers in Psychology](https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01873/pdf)
33. [PMC (10086334)](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10086334/)
34. [Mr Barton Maths](https://mrbartonmaths.com/resourcesnew/8.%20Research/Mindset/Mindset%20replication.pdf)
35. [Knowunity](https://knowunity.co.uk/knows/psychology-development-blackwell-et-als-study-a172c5a2-8ccc-4b1c-8f20-8c7d4e4ad70e)
36. [PubMed (Mueller & Dweck)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9686450/)
37. [Progress Focused (Mueller & Dweck)](https://www.progressfocused.com/2020/09/mueller-dweck-1998-classic-study.html)
38. [Selah Counselling Services](https://selahcounsellingservices.com/the-power-of-praise-effort-based-vs-intelligence-based-their-effects-on-performance/)
39. [Semantic Scholar](https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Praise-for-intelligence-can-undermine-children%27s-Mueller-Dweck/bb2578ea8c965a550a2fee93e0197b9227b917a5)
40. [ResearchGate: Effects of praise on VET students](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/333666746_The_effects_of_praise_for_effort_versus_praise_for_intelligence_on_vocational_education_students)
41. [K12 Dive](https://www.k12dive.com/news/are-growth-mindset-programs-a-waste-of-money-to-taxpayers-and-schools/525472/)
42. [Hechinger Report](https://hechingerreport.org/should-taxpayers-and-schools-invest-in-growth-mindset-programs/)
43. [SPSP](https://spsp.org/news-center/character-context-blog/schools-buy-growth-mindset-interventions-despite-evidence)
44. [MDRC](https://www.mdrc.org/work/projects/analysis-growth-mindset-study-data)
45. [IES (WWC_GrowthMindset)](https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Docs/InterventionReports/WWC_GrowthMindset_IR_report.pdf)
46. [PMC (11606800)](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11606800/)
47. [ICPSR (37353)](https://www.icpsr.umich.edu/web/ICPSR/studies/37353/publications)
48. [ResearchGate (389570705)](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/389570705_Growth_mindset_and_academic_achievement_a_multilevel_analysis_of_upper_secondary_school_completion)
49. [PNAS](https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2210704120)
50. [ResearchGate (NSLM)](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/335029154_A_national_experiment_reveals_where_a_growth_mindset_improves_achievement)
51. [PMC (5996155)](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5996155/)
52. [Mountain Scholar](https://mountainscholar.org/bitstreams/5a24f638-68a4-46af-9246-a1b0cf1b6368/download)
53. [SPARQ Stanford](https://sparq.stanford.edu/sites/g/files/sbiybj19021/files/media/file/blackwell_et_al._2007_-_implicit_theories_of_intelligence.pdf)
54. [ResearchGate (Blackwell 2007)](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/6477294_Implicit_Theories_of_Intelligence_Predict_Achievement_Across_an_Adolescent_Transition_A_Longitudinal_Study_and_an_Intervention)
55. [PMC (7937610)](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7937610/)
56. [Taylor & Francis](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/01443410.2019.1625306)
57. [Psi Chi](https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.psichi.org/resource/resmgr/journal_2016/Spring16JNGambino.pdf)
58. [MDPI](https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7102/15/3/327)
59. [UPenn](https://cpb-us-w2.wpmucdn.com/web.sas.upenn.edu/dist/b/398/files/2019/04/1998-04530-003-1sagefw.pdf)
60. [PMC (6176062)](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6176062/)
61. [PubMed (36326645)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36326645/)
62. [HHS Purdue (2023 Meta)](https://hhs.purdue.edu/skill-learning-and-performance-lab/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2024/08/2023-90931-004.pdf)
63. [Case Western (Meta)](https://artscimedia.case.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/141/2020/06/26110114/Barnett-Macnamara-2023.pdf)
64. [Happy Families](https://happyfamilies.com.au/articles/how-mindset-impacts-academic-achievement)
65. [PubMed (37701627)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37701627/)
66. [OECD OPSI](https://oecd-opsi.org/bi-projects/instilling-a-growth-mindset-in-indonesia/)
67. [PMC (12637945)](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12637945/)
68. [OECD Publications](https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/can-a-growth-mindset-help-disadvantaged-students-close-the-gap_20922f0d-en.html)
69. [RePEc](https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v14y2024i1p21582440231225870.html)
70. [OECD PISA 2018](https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/pisa-2018-results-volume-iii_acd78851-en/full-report/component-20.html)
71. [Scribd](https://www.scribd.com/document/699494247/HOW-TO-STOP-NEGATIVE)
72. [Success Odyssey Hub](https://successodysseyhub.com/blog/growth-mindset-vs-fixed)
73. [Buzzsprout (1936274)](https://feeds.buzzsprout.com/1936274.rss)
74. [UV.es](https://www.uv.es/friasnav/EffectSizeBecker.pdf)
75. [Lakens GitHub](https://lakens.github.io/statistical_inferences/06-effectsize.html)
76. [Progress Focused](https://www.progressfocused.com/2020/09/mueller-dweck-1998-classic-study.html)
77. [PMC (6736231)](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6736231/)
78. [ResearchGate (Effect Size)](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320928479_Effect_Size)
79. [Murray State](https://digitalcommons.murraystate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1069&context=etd)
80. [Success Odyssey Hub (False Growth Mindset)](https://successodysseyhub.com/blog/growth-mindset-vs-fixed)
81. [ResearchGate (Mindset Context)](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/350978322_Beliefs_Affordances_and_Adolescent_Development_Lessons_from_a_Decade_of_Growth_Mindset_Interventions)
82. [Podcast Republic](https://www.podcastrepublic.net/podcast/1666268356)
83. [Buzzsprout (False Mindset)](https://feeds.buzzsprout.com/1936274.rss)
84. [PubMed (17328703)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17328703/)
85. [SPARQ Stanford (Blackwell 2007)](https://sparq.stanford.edu/sites/g/files/sbiybj19021/files/media/file/blackwell_et_al._2007_-_implicit_theories_of_intelligence.pdf)
86. [ResearchGate (Blackwell 2007)](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/6477294_Implicit_Theories_of_Intelligence_Predict_Achievement_Across_an_Adolescent_Transition_A_Longitudinal_Study_and_an_Intervention)
87. [Vanderbilt University](https://www.vanderbilt.edu/data/2026/02/23/the-value-of-effect-sizes/)
88. [SCIRP (3405175)](https://www.scirp.org/reference/referencespapers?referenceid=3405175)

**Sources:**
1. [nih.gov](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQEQ_92h2Tttqgl3hx2tujP9255koRVOiwjAQx61uZxNAvxLlRbWQ7IfpBqe44jpCqB3Cqcmer_-G8g6-CuUv0qUpiOaPmJ0oJliM76tzudlJENYc8fOfX6bgsBCPcMDmtahgkjFOupx)
2. [oecd.org](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQFoso2EwMhHiVYMv5kjitlHDg7K9ZXmr0HVPEXbaQAUQSLdaM7TOPedsAaYkWOuQfb0F8CGbSQ2Y2C0X02b1EdS976KmXGUKV3Eg5P5I8_u5AHDacYvzKMKbd1gcDllH__KBtFJwyoGtQf7v_zdv7HrPXWewDju1I_9eP9LRGMNP05cp8LN9WuVZiot8cCVi0pDaDAJlLAXzDveCAnsayHl545WbolY1ZQHrg==)
3. [stanford.edu](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQFCbNrKy4Du0ScJXrEzLlPlje6qTnsWN9KyqA8d6O_AccDKz_RzPZxcA9idEhzke3Ryi14JbrVBjDCQelZlHqSDzfNKkCTLWNeD4EWtF8hZqesLrDu4NSoN1DFRlXTHIaEtwig-MMR95a7K3lSxYJjqUViTW48Gno9n00nar5iDMOXlGOVVS5zxqssiEBLK8qGFIpcvNBg2H8iEPgwP7nOodNLVrgKgxBXPd9Atx2nQRsDzb3wq-hAwKI8=)
4. [evidencebasedteaching.org](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQEQJC2vaCFDbssxmhj4-ciQe7ytVOL3A1iuhT2gVZ18vPNUWOla3GXGPciwlPMlokAy2XwpVHIp0oTbKXWIvudL3KbrcbCMrb6D_uwylifb3qJQdIwttuLMtePLAVpkzb821VzpNxvefUlNytscu1g3j5RNMTIW3Ys=)
5. [frontiersin.org](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQEzU39htMYMvBDBYFOuH6Iotrq3l8VySt-cyJKWkT0S1yjS3bw--ZUtigMe9cuWQnGovjnjLuosDKilc_vMf0EXymSjqu96D8cgYyz5_hqAVfu7JeC7_7h_llAzTvaad3jEz43Xpjzmnfc4m-QIaANqePD_FN07bA==)
6. [mitraining.edu.au](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQFW9eK_hZZ0GjTKsDiChx2xB4yF8mwIFqnYTwPCZZwffU1JLhP6PrVslphcUPJoygf5p2-HRMIemFNs4cmzJ6paQ7mADw9uyDGtfbgtXyHFi7p6eLIWNAND8KANW0JL6j0yh0HsIla2CZxDe3dT-K2J_GObkaYb33PCkCqnk0lBGLvCvqj3k-cipqg1uN15kUmpHSh5CA==)
7. [nih.gov](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQFcXFWg6wxontygwuk4m4OfBA16aozObnSTeBievkBbqqfr0jfu0L26m9HWM1H04zgf1vtGqMk10cP8KvJwZ3qijgdErI6-Qx-Y0SAJ_mL9l5329V-YtghRlVx8gr5FEJrwXmWPuz6x)
8. [nih.gov](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQHaYN57FVPaiceB2oru_sh519-0fgaEH3mK2C1o-pIoNks59fuG07T4OQO166_X9X26Oh4aUUKt-EZJq5PbpGHDx5Byf5p1u99_TaxzEiBH8HjuyppbcRqqIaoryuvlyML-56ARW2YS)
9. [spsp.org](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQHNqPNBUdJPwkDYIu7Py-nbeh_Z2y9VQOOFjN2XO8pa2JYqbLBdz2yOREEL27Ap4BptcsJeSOuCi4QydHZNyOAuLm0jJxlKHU29cxceOc8T6L_sq4p92NGnI6Hba8ymBd3rt5wpV2L-erPVIzON87jW8UuehM5GESHfhL3FXMRDLbolvQu8Gce0BHPIChgTAg4mFWanHA9TBd3tzu_U7iWrbAcm)
10. [mdrc.org](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQGyTJT36tVE4BkrgLpsSvz5tZ0pzAEhZ1o6eTjUVlqFrrYbTvTkAOB6yJs2WovvPBPsoMkXYFqg_8qMC_ilXWeW_7HNvoahQsneeHwr26ufVhSR0xZnAJf1umfpV30tKf4NBBD3x5uhZBJQGmc7UCcVz0jncI9mQadbHzs=)
11. [nih.gov](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQG8_Ad_LqixsBUj-TMliQXzbgdPggIpMoXnirIA1CaTHhrS6OuB4U7OyLlKtQ-YyaKvVWnDroGrbiX8yyKBjjHhwhcPZA6GbVBdcpDR_UsVS-wdrc9NlxFswMoFJ_Hf)
12. [progressfocused.com](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQHOId0r6SAOgYgl9HMorJU4Ean_3WDF8BRMJYUJLXz5unotlBksjRPTdi23poveQnbQ8JAfJ3ma9yicUYMcefzOLkhkv7Xz6QEc5bufHx4HVbEmNBousJ0u3NCNWyhtT1isf00lgXuMJaGUvadoGdAgVNg3RFOi6N3oK3DWUGd1BI9S7A==)
13. [wpmucdn.com](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQFGjUu77DGs9mW7cLRTEfIhsCfzPQxjNVHVI7g1UC6-PtTRFTX6UCwhFdl3Png_VtevSEWE_w-EJz0xhDcbg-Tas-SiH72SdaWpPOwFakV75G_ZqlscMZuRkYNLFb6RSKkAXFwoyJL_Hz8vFRyhWIukVsiJauhcVI6grle-FNMOVBYu55Z-UtLCB9SxpNYgrhKUI_Fiikh7D2U=)
14. [researchgate.net](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQGM6KjIc3jk_Dkl652gbmewV91JCV3YTXM3JX5JfrVSJLXgs49SBhwPD9GyECSmEg3-gnVTO2wuiaql73begWhqQbR_zP_yKffq_fLigNW3w-mYikjz061wfxvoUFj6tnvv8n3OrX-X4Bz-xaipb_ljHs0xgThgx42--tlyv5ivDedooTKgEJf3vZjW9cm9DcMBVXjJywxAbf5cPROqVNMGf2quYEO_9zH6H4zgc7jgOR-fL3A8X_c_7CyX9LO3ufDUJnYTXVIhdnSU)
15. [nih.gov](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQGrrtUTbSKRFkrQlzONimKnolETly5gPf3MsnVT2kef8M36pbypuYCGQXAkfoT0gmFo6dGoDmwKXqnf4U5oICH6PqwBgqUJWL7Pcl4EZFSUXOz-2tgmJ0RRDyYvk-4B9JiEnZ8LzQlF)
16. [selahcounsellingservices.com](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQEPUqh6nS71LNmQbjw54CTqzsMFAxfEkFC0VcuAfr0iHahpOWIAR6ZgjSBj5itH-OnWFv8CBihk70xRlfpcbh5dh_iYtv1r5MeU6qz40zCOcwua3aBlEqdGH2Id34lKOTaFue0iSsmRcquk1IDTjSjB0gXuMPtKH6KPUzn0R4qBlaMgPWhoiuPk9Cn_Qe0Tc1oMhbKLCFrLTjga40skodZUNpyPohz5p2qw52zKXf9C)
17. [tandfonline.com](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQHym4tb-4l6ym8gCiWluWS_ocVHdMgFFpJgDMyGPebX-yNzPONkgx8NQq0FDYSDTm4G7-tKgBrNbvpxjgefrA5Uomycw29Zl-sA219Drbwd62vXYo4IAA-pzV7UCwGQ3F6DpR8nl34zm6JBVldJcXpVucfxgG0Dzw==)
18. [lumenlearning.com](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQE0yzB7dA2rI5QH_OaofvCxFmsoKzV4H-9NkilyA2iQj6KA5Pu8zxzGc2K2bYI9rg8QkSqohYN37g-Bw3OwP49ReYnU5ct8c4qEWs4UMXRBwNxUS6rsoO6PBO_YzxtPawABYXUaD3o_68uGyxtxDTy9d-HTAJ-jFjhDVcCcQTizdD1dl1NsV-uJQ7D_ogUoyR-YxWqOOism)
19. [growthmindsetmaths.com](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQF-XlhrQJMvnl6AQXS7KT7MqNuZnOG_SC12NyIApEOQIB_znJ0o1XOdDiEm-d52x_s8RIQL_ABMiqLU5FwJCitWMVpd5wuhov2A2fKqZjnoEXLVrlYO4O41MxRoMFNyU3etxL8IjImklhk05UvdmHz-Bs5FNwgcx7qg69FXCQpCXN9lD0gwWw8T7yyFQw1QfxyT-LAKCankV8omedgfDIXzYZYpBQ==)
20. [researchgate.net](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQFRnMR71uTUozmEfSOfp9qQ-a7siw_j6iHzcJqZwPqDN54p_COyHALs5zoL4WA1u681fSzAzek9VgXsUq-VQS8cpGdXt0VXFjRcstu0N24bjhLIHFzAFUyJ9PJnJW8frJiV5v2Jaw2CEKv8Aq6RaIgWv6hmvlnLgmsBeDnws223EXCd7vSEj2IKPXYme5lnH2dtVUB1ar37X5w-cIUQSt_1gYMAFKwsAktJKpVTAoq8O3567SaLQ0bR3rYV3gZiOFtCG9rys5hmYs6OySOoq_MnlH2nDX1Rzrv6EQEhr_SNHFJ6mm9YQg==)
21. [nih.gov](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQFUk2eROHE3FfR7dz7Lmg0vlHSVsg0XbVXsChbkrNIzGG8Qu6NNQWuZAdNYUtYtDNY3-AUgtVx6kh4JTPWlxs2KqIMH5Kw75jMLGPjcttj9f-mudsujfdis9XWhIwFdQA==)
22. [knowunity.co.uk](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQFkz1l0JtlitME89GeVOgOGpG-_gI10nbhgprnYaLP30Z0uWtOsC5N-RcvXdyMZZC1qTM7nBTP7CAfcqFVg1kw-3BkrFIwJkqAXOB4DEKgV9WJGYbhKr7ENNuU_KPMyYBIqRITfIn7m-7006_3B0xRuLu8B6DM9d1J7Lrvo9wTkQ0B1REvo8w8apy-s8GU_xo7hQEf-fr-fhgMimwXjKcsXTvl6zqHx)
23. [case.edu](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQGX9-WxXgbjZtOIPB7qAY8x69WlCGfu4QZOMp2oGoDnRKyE6qg-zPsHrlOVfzGzywnVqsrCjdh8LqTk-iIHUqJPubi5dhlvMf8vLgV92h5nh70GmDRSU_57CmwWUCMC_5tkNtDIF-0UOogs_4JdbpKPKdIQK0ramex5SNPY3EsrFHxR6X1LhkB56l9gxRpZpN4MP7QqnNvHnl_YoPsFQr5TRG_w2nzAewN6CguE-_wE96GnklNEnjjqbXDO3CMnAQ==)
24. [medium.com](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQFNiYJolQ-XKuMvuBOc8hiqc5VOf6js3nTOLIevgBecxCk3_ZnHGAwnGNHDNWGg_L8OXK4jjzvdZuroP3njwqEyX2lz7Dls_8FzDlVlKWHqbNpN5K5Op8yMhOyhurrxqzAJQUJrA7TR8S0wdinWOzHfXCh0MAoyR3VYH1HKovs34PgmcqHzcq4I3mvNXv1eB6j2U3tHJGdBM3SJ_CoFHQ==)
25. [super.so](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQFuxIE_uaP9L1Klzjz1mbuBcEC04Eh_OcPsWQ5GavIUDTcJzdB66N4pKOROob_6Jb3zTLlMkv2Wnsck-4qOsapKRZx5COW5mUDSzgcmMd6GJUKmGcshJ2HTKgaRBsFcHoZGg3sMC28Uh7IVKvUHY6Glg-1NtJWUYrGEU-zqkcA5kKQYeFxVuVQgskNEVoQ6EOZSCuj9BacTB5cyKVU1zZZsWQr4oQQMmpr_R7SbwjG1kbjb2E6mq93NiS6qMEfeG6CnnI62IIB-BjjTO06A7PwH4WEgYGIavE8LKHo=)
26. [forbes.com](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQFLd15h2ETKOxl0bjsuYV0VAyTpAuPkN4Hgz-DV0gw6xdXw05GpTWdASB-1JyKUyD2nUaS4tUr64e4BWAVqDbtoPW29LwVTKQgWCqbCsG_yNAP3ihUlQJ2ikc2HvSmDPdFSr9sUUOOJ32Z4KdudaxGOQVmvPeTUIeVCpqr_x8cgsLBcuxvQ2v_91PZrYrff-MLSBkbqwJQIPiRbkFZjKYWimKEsMd6cGfnyFarBHg==)
27. [inc.com](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQFftTKOn451DFTab4qyjL3sAYKUuDnbeEy1jQd0lxTkb4XbEksbahaQ8cWQA6Z6EMJyC7M7bEe9aJ03BuCuY95nh4salFhcUtIHaRqSaDV_cClWgJ8iby_zK76iqt9bE3MyqP7g_9oPra-83_5E2qR5C5Skax_E-JjbYpmwI1uj6HROBMAt3gcrTblBPLhae0Li_K6Sa-r6QYk40RSvbMw9p55Rmfc08I6-fIVHKmiQI0mJDeGh9KpBlXk_Mo0qlQ==)
28. [economictimes.com](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQGTlyjnooOMd31H1YZP9mo-q5mSbL1dDCxGDjlkEscdYYarLiJ3JlRgSuNLOuQyLwP_SydrsNLbtGs5PHF-N-KmzvmtIlZjkXPlDanatKJ61Ji3q-AtgKFtbCEqfBENpbpw12QcsDw1kVgvNQZczQsJFlhAtP0QaurrCQG71SHpHLidgiKVcMznQSasQRkb9t853sGyB5aXZmElPTn1T8nDojfXIJeaq4KPhbyXnA47z9GHSSVmp4D_Qa_l6cyxQSFancqirA8=)
29. [successodysseyhub.com](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQEjnlUN-6y1kjuLtblyzikz_6I28ROqJWBuqnMVunkgkoaSmXJHSLfDRS_M0T3wjD9uYRO0C-IZxLLORzkE9flk1y-I7pb8NvgYpe3AvUzgN05VWUeZuqmxjQ2aqim-FCz8sA07glUIMCVAeiKWyQdo)
30. [murraystate.edu](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQGjYRKjQp1vafRoBfMpu_AMEeHn8wL1dhhJ3PGMlnlo4VvLSkkSOgM3P2qeXraZAWfId0342wtS85QPZWffKDeUHblbuflIKt_9kqPYYRZdOAFJReil371VbQYMjLEeARoppBkQ_BGk8a0FYk1U9MoRL1jnYBvz-WAyaXoK4Q7I6aIsSlRzBhTEAQ==)
31. [researchgate.net](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQGiftj7HqeDQ19f9XTQKFpwrs6YHwF9pHTbq7gpboDfjTqt8R6aaAqkqtX502iXzLByfGeiONIrA1exMeCcscocwnjSee_X7rJTOUD6icUB97vI90lKK__x63Nuw7xPSja3ZZKOXcAyYLBVNuXpmhai1McdmKgQxm8fhIjxdWEQL4lhpLrupiW9CzBqmP4xP69v8h13FmftNOQwzRCCgVS9BVLMKS5LRAMD1Li9pWjVEP_Zi_KFQtrBbiVps1kjRVtmrwmnPHhE53TX1UhWFA==)
32. [scribd.com](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQHc3g_bsuWqLzNwpLJJJ8CuBjVFVJmwjH1Y-1GYPY4sX3BlwdrPRUusPrHlX6ZPc8r988bNma1ELzXGvXbcOMsaFQSvFXTLbGbxAvC4bPdwg57ZvxeoDOXa8f6NGtNj1o9311wRkHQJTAgRQ-dTN1yeZMNGTg==)
33. [karenallen.co](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQHuBQ-RtuYc9dO-TY1StTvRfYI2rf0q3yeozslPxY1a4BSbybC9WLE1QQAO7Xutxj8Yx489xqSNEpJCaHoj0peXeLqtkb8ugfn8chtdcHG6a1o-o-CN4D4mbjklYZsWYu-msTvxixSjCTrudegYFwliQFjeCMVgALcnI0F0sUawfXZW6nSsvw==)
34. [buzzsprout.com](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQE604yBmaH9ANFY4KsrQIFCNVYV5Xmr2iwZH-CHIbDZIcLnm1PN4P8qIXrqWjGoXdQUCd5vplfVNDNeMb0hgImAuV-8ar1Q0ZI4Fy_VIBhG05hJdOSqCnC7HfDkGoLH)
35. [franklincovey.com](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQE3-atgVlPGL7MX-Lg45BJ7QsiGFU4uG5gjK71fML3xivaD1_0dcvtF9_SMUbtlI7C4xgdM8yJnusOe0GacpHkj_vSIcgaWxxex3V7i7CW2dYgy5i5zLaXnaHABOzlUYi7PwOWyAYfP8U0IYbhoqAv4raE=)
36. [mdpi.com](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQG2hLpLSeb8Ye1t2sDAvLgJcGBgQadjnzoYIr9M4faGtZpx_bakvjqzbg-DmG4LZ88AKvgLzGsHDwoZTxeXfszhneZby3aKX7MIBVVQUhc_vE47EffpOwJqAwSkamg=)
37. [nih.gov](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQE0XNSJtdeYx5ONDTXgO448neRpl-kDXr0wdeHPQZO0T0O0U6VuJbKoWfdeqk2tCmpqCd-faG4hDJ365qR0jbKRxPTK-vucvuUywIDmGL6QcV7Y1j7b7gAiRm9LprcBEQ==)
38. [happyfamilies.com.au](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQGddo3Bi4lS05bAFceuL81St28_hy51hq1mZihohcPhd4Zoyn1LVTqFuM4FG_WKTokjBbGppuQrDaiJZeKGEhggpGB4LIjQ973c77-TdGjPHz5Bu8C5PMJZlPmjmfyRALCgek_AR3qJ3AhRIDu8vtCjoeiGWTU0lHpeE6bgqRxXWJA6nWM=)
39. [purdue.edu](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQFIq37Ieskq1SXgSvBPDRN_Hd8VO5RxzXBfh1IddyyOMdfZ4lw36YshWfwZut3zvdVBvDcQDMzXFiEUAAhXaJdZ0RAKLyfiNTEWMwpMaa-IYpKDYl796FdNV7lqZS37XhVvYr7EqmTxbYuaYIC2-IfEqYkBAiAmO9l2Lu98w6dVwQirDN0T86GnUlP27JjFGQwqIhchZj4geqm0RWdLMLuq6YesoiLS)
40. [github.io](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQEJeWMUWJlp09nR7MieHIvhv-hLrqrQtQuRJmjHDA13wFdy3n_cR0U910wjrZlk4hLw4KHBsVpA-cG7bWcLnRg_q6_2a8D9o_16q38ucZHC6DibcP-AhDCcXqeTGSbniWFNQk2k_XxXH6d3QVixqrcxw3sU8Ihziik=)
41. [vanderbilt.edu](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQFYeQ0BbkmRKXE-LU9JW7RnUUhA3ogVzPmFxGLHnnZ00vK0-IjsCCNFYZy4WJ_clopTkboYHDvqqH1AgrvXZ9999vAdw8QMdj1STMp3r3tXcRT88asK1w5kcdSC0Rmamo3oMQpEvLK3IbyloPlnm0uAtSDH795XUo-w6ak=)
42. [uv.es](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQG5ws6qkQqZQ5S_KYBIHp0pr8OzM2YGrkRLqMlOTKQ80yuA2S-UotzVheFKOxVX76frVR7TZwLi5o0Yz_EjvYbg8sWGZ2t6jqyFsE9gLCoMeGkBkHAvzRYmb0nwM5uFeBx-_dT86g==)
43. [researchgate.net](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQEhzYm6x6G5aeDYkbgXVK5PddW4EKpuTOhj3lpsqRdXdcT2SHXYr2uXZT0ISLoKnUzhGUzn6xgJHQsONUX0Ne9yxyiuPkLDXuhFMQpyRd2JQr_AppWS7kJtJHbDaKG0msVdwvGKC2wQYlYxA0vqMMvNTYnQLw==)
44. [nih.gov](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQGHK-vQ6DFO5VnrcxLaqGuVBNnZJtP1mST0tpYMOoIWuKMxn7EDsfNQ5dd2YN64Umope9wCkfhhLO2UBKPZ0zD8_FjAryBITxfiwYcU1Q0T7tGTltH562nBzNrgNuhKSeTxUcOqauAG)
45. [k12dive.com](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQHEnvSiNzg2Vclu3cDBo-lGws70a-yRvtu1xL_s4TxqeGMfuJsInzDjK6wbcQzMNBHwlwnHNF60FGJKhmJew-5h__mZBhShNn_BB7bdkbK3YMf8EyRMSfiFjKRFQltwq6tnYSZD0_1_a4bMJoWJOEdFAJemnYs-PMCCKwmP3mJnUjOYULU4RJR5KA0PmjjjXztdk6J8a_yPoD_C70kh3xG6)
46. [hechingerreport.org](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQHcbRUWhMrziWUll0XE6ubQl5Un1Bs-_7JZwcoh7FH2XgT1RNwPMhdX6fom0CSj9V8EQswq6FN5IedudloMFUSjEDYLoS5ZplMSBesf51RphHoBWgZtyVr9-L24YdjjAZPRsBOBHSa01fx3bC-WUnZkit_AaAk3BqzDPuehulbM8tk-aTPfoVwVB8Cu7Jwrf9IU)
47. [edweek.org](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQE2sL5rin--TdNlkK1YI9Ra6zp3oSfQ6N1mO3UW3AYDBmvRSsE_PUivVgDVSYk4b22QnuymYNQKAgf-a7ohTcZLXIKPNWpl9ueSv4iCUMFxZql4ij3oqKEgbCtI5Q4Ltp2xWYMFOBSSQUtu7qtsg3Ktx_kgYiV4YvYpUFrPDKb0vsa8zfA9gLm6-WImf35K7sXP-uJ-_U9Utg==)
48. [nih.gov](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQGk5U3f4U0U5gGj4hok6cvHBQUAlefWDomI2b5X2-HobYFF-awVjc9mAkhuAb-cIZ0XNvEGzRYipewE9s86sSGehSfSMjZety85ZohZ6TAg8mxH78ah1OVtoHEA9I6OxQ==)
49. [atticusli.com](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQHZAo4FTrhDVaBEU1zIaHn_2UH7DUEvL0a1Ohl4a-9-87Pf6s95j9u8xG3gFspSOP9vk1Ho0h8dH4zU3ixRtAbrEpU_dYaJiR2a2VMmxurma7HaSe2CZpqTx9a2yj2DKUFszlkH30u3nfW-iXNY_A==)
50. [researchgate.net](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQESOF3c8dIWKyOgIhRXJ1spwE47FmaNUs4_pqhHd6nTgwz4hKMtk960JBoLT1Ep62b8EShQ3RjKUM3FYYa1eUl02159j0TnpF0WQglyC93E4OhEJdcSDhbUUo9vz1ppY1A6bxBSw1M1yuzcTBOViRpyNUDAXxb02MUvwLzee0A1HXGzHcdZ2LIa9ROL_qWaLbwREvcnaLHOLE0YdcBjXH7MLW_x1mBL4CBRh9o78NsadDMO)
51. [purdue.edu](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQHHqtk3KM2ebnuTSvxLt4hKaujl_RRWyZjZh4AQfgW4QVfL3x0g3NA4uKJW8MrW2RZZNDHq5ctWv_P2OS2SRe2_l9D-DzXK9YFcBNAZyZMM6cQRHvjdhT5gXL33xjDB08DUHSgl4dBABqMbCXFRoAO_H0mCpzWWYOWtUFqwr5DSnAAodFJRCg2TYkN0DRlyhHyBQjwpUvds5aNfR1TkaXNplYSYSGPBkk9JXiSVvTvOEv789w==)
52. [nih.gov](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQF3PdLlXV88mX9NxooY2ChMzGj-6HfQJNzNxWhUMOUiGJjSzwiIvWsfj44IlpaUUgLvJku9_qBGhwZsrAv1zFPAQW_toLbg3fePi_QP37tkLmmzoBwX2xh4SPEpSZa1QcAtjHlw5pyL8g==)
53. [case.edu](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQG35uUdusAcusnDuHFsCCW1K9U4xVJUd7NLIBuqItty6g8TSWjn5sxQsqpX-1YJXd1Nv1KgcT-MrcihEZskj-3QiQ1YHqunre7wN47yxrlWD3-eWy_nvd5ZGh7VFz-2MQ21-VKNMwbUVx8faei7qjPGHHB3HWAePbCg6lx5gqGyrLdYalVGRdFgBmLsNQEINzvSLTHQ2G9Idn48hA==)
54. [nih.gov](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQGpSz40TFZVPguYFPiB9tQFWEuPo3IqBQwauI5XOGMG1bOehXHtRZqUG_CUQ6ksr2L6N8fIDi1yIT0gpNHghl-614ugapLNGZBdffLeuw-XX76tEsLKwijGBGgOx__os9w_-NYdOs3UTQ==)
55. [oecd.org](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQFp-g-ErWr3-fkGcc6r9T3hVxjPkWeVFdVIKqbaaVC_BYbHKtJlOof3Fces4rKCwMA3AWi1T0O8YD6XURMYlYV8sKSf_PpOjob1hir_tcP0JcTRRc8Qd7o_7i3JlmQMEYH76PGaUu2fyv7YZG_IvtCDj-3RCoEi7qvl6e2Lw08Ng36y1Q2XqmybE2QfAQIB_iupOazs-DJU5GJDMUGDgIIjyw==)
56. [oecd-opsi.org](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQGIxZDeTIr63k33zvhL9KowEVE3-P541ZWWDceW-fxxeBxKfM7wsZg1CEM5r4aLoAPxC5L1ud3pcciGP8TUmHhDZKAWxKn4UMwvpBqoAz9rsfKZ5iKtGO63bxKdGmIMToBV50xrffsAXY6i6-M4NhdhsppuuOMjdz8cSsmlRZjMuHk=)
57. [repec.org](https://vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com/grounding-api-redirect/AUZIYQGQXUm6TLVqltzvq7HxSfJHY2oB0TpLhfvfLYraqS6_VdicwGmJVbXf_y_YQGmn8ov1bAsf3UaLetrYq9JscQNc-n_mk6A2D5u06SWdb6qaOo1zQVxF7vwb9PuavKW9-kFAe7TIi9Ta4KGRB4UzJl2QNJxoqMC0fpV_tEEp)