The results as we know them

Following on from the previous blog post which summarised my research so far, this blog post is going to summarise and explain the results of the original research and give you an idea of how things stand so far.

Results of the first research objective: ‘Is the prevalence of a growth mindset higher in neurotypical students or those with Special Educational Needs?’ demonstrated that there is no significant difference between the growth mindset score of neurotypical students and the growth mindset score of students with SEN. The neurotypical students scored an average of 10.8 on the scale (where 12 was the maximum growth mindset score demonstrating a growth mindset), whereas students with SEN scored an average of 7.2 on the same scale. This shows that, on average, neurotypical students do have a higher prevalence of growth mindset as the hypothesis stated, however further analysis of the data showed that this result was not significant. As stated above, data was statistically analysed using the Mann-Whitney U test, however both the U value (at 3.5 compared the critical value of 2) and the Z-score (at -1.78 compared to the p-value at 0.75) showed the results as not significant.

The results for the second research objective: ‘How can a growth mindset be fostered in students with Special Educational Needs?’ was firstly based on a thematic analysis of interview transcripts. The thematic analysis discovered that teachers believed the best tool to foster growth mindset in students with SEN is to challenge thought and speech patterns and to model positive mindset and speech patterns to the student. 75% of participants mentioned this as a method. Many other methods were noted within the staff interviews including the use of reflection and differentiation but these scored significantly lower on the thematic analysis .

Further information was sought from a school-wide survey as stated in the method. The results of this showed that 79.59% of participants believed modelling positive thought/speech patterns fostered growth mindset in students with SEN. In addition, 63.27% of participants believed that teaching resilience and resilience techniques fosters growth mindset in students with SEN supporting the findings from the smaller study discussed above

The results for the third research objective: ‘How does a growth mindset benefit those with Special Educational Needs?’ were again firstly based on thematic analysis of the interview transcripts . According to the participants, the main benefits of growth mindset for students with SEN were the knowledge and synoptic links they were able to develop which consequently increased their grades. Again, 75% of participants mentioned this as a benefit.

In contrast, out of the 57 participants who took the survey, 44 (70.18%) believed students with SEN would benefit from growth mindset as they would have higher resilience. This is in contrast to the staff interviews. Indeed, only 25.56% and 21.05% believed growth mindset would improve students’ knowledge and synoptic links respectively if that student had SEN


In conclusion, the research revealed that, in relation to the first research objective, there is a difference in the prevalence of growth mindset of students with SEN and the prevalence of growth mindset in neurotypical students with the neurotypical students showing, on average, more of a growth mindset than the students with SEN. However, this was further proven to be statistically irrelevant through statistical analysis. The implications of this are that firstly, there is evidence to suggest that students with SEN would benefit from growth mindset interventions in order to give them an equal basis from which to achieve, both academically and personally. This may then serve to reduce the achievement gap between students with SEN and neurotypical students.

Regarding the second research objective, the main technique discovered for encouraging growth mindset in students with SEN was to challenge the negative thought patterns and model positive thought patterns to the students. This was supported by both the staff interview and the school-wide survey which gave a combined sample of 62 staff. However the educational context used for the study contains a high percentage of white, middle-class students due to geographical restrictions, and therefore this result may not be generalisable to the wider population. The consequences of these findings however may be far-reaching; this research suggests that the challenging of students negative thought patterns, including through the modelling of a staff member’s own positive mindset, may encourage a student to develop a growth mindset.

Finally, concerning the third research objective, the study has uncovered a dichotomy in staff thinking regarding the benefits of growth mindset in students with SEN. The staff interviews clearly concluded that the common benefit was subject knowledge and the resulting improvement in grades, however, the wider reaching staff survey concluded, in direct contradiction of the interviews, that the common benefit of growth mindset for students with SEN was increased resilience. The main implication of this finding is that further research is required to solve the discrepancy between the two methods and that, preferably, this be conducted on a larger, more representative sample to increase the validity of the results. The results of this study further add to the mixed results of other research which has proven equally inconclusive in regards to the benefits of growth mindset although little work has been completed with students with SEN.


Bailey, R. (2017) The prevalence and benefits of growth mindset in students with SEN (Masters Thesis), University of Roehampton: London.