Research

Scheduled to present at the annual meeting of the Labor Employment Relations Association (LERA) conference in NYC, June 2024.

Abstract

Rapid technological advances in robotics and artificial intelligence influence the challenges and composition of tasks completed by workers, in both existing and emerging occupations, necessitating nearly continuous learning and experimentation among managers, workers, and new/returning labor market entrants. In this project, funded by a subgrant of the Federal Build Back Better Regional Challenge award focused on workforce development training programs in Southwestern PA, we embed growth mindset training in existing workforce development programs. The growth mindset training is interdisciplinary (using neuroscience, education, and cognitive psychology research), and is collaboratively designed with the community stakeholders, using a community based/community engaged research approach. We implement the training with organizations that support key populations including youth, justice-involved job seekers, skilled apprentices and trainees, and educators at all levels (K-12, regional universities, and community colleges). This paper discusses the training components, which affirm to both job trainers and trainees that our skills are malleable and improve with effort, support, and strategies. In this phase of the project, we train job trainers/instructors/mentors of training programs and use a pre-post assessment to determine the effectiveness of the training session. Early results imply that a short 75 minute session can influence trainers’ mindset beliefs (by .88 s.d.) and self-efficacy by 14 percentage points (or .84 s.d.). This paper provides resources for others to implement growth mindsets in their contexts and discusses directions for future work.

 Keywords: Growth Mindset, Management, Job Training, Train-the-Trainer

JEL Codes: M53- Personnel Economics: Training,  I24-Education and Inequality

Submitted to Advances in Industrial Labor Relations and presented at the annual meeting of the Labor Employment Relations Association (LERA) conference in Detroit. June 2, 2023. Paper Link.

Abstract

This paper examines workers’ stated workplace retention plans by leveraging a survey of nearly 5,000 randomly selected adults from Northeast Ohio during the pandemic recovery period in 2022. We investigate what workplace experiences and benefits increase or decrease the likelihood of planned retention at a workers’ current job and planned job search. We find that retention plans are increasing in workers’ satisfaction, pay satisfaction, and desire for training, and for workers who are in the middle or at the end of their career relative to early career. We also investigate the relative importance of remote work on retention plans. We show that retention plans decrease as the demands for the job interfere with workers’ family lives, and as workers reported increased stress at work during the pandemic. We find workers with reported perceived financial security, and second/alternative income sources are also less likely to plan to be retained by their current employer and more likely to search for work. We conduct subgroup analyses and discuss how different amenities are important to different worker subsets. We conclude by offering recommendations for how employers may increase retention and policymakers may support job seekers and hiring firms.

 Keywords: Labor Economics, Retention, Employment Benefits, Worker Preferences, Job Search

JEL Codes: J2- Demand and Supply of Labor, J32: Nonwage Labor Costs and Benefits 

Full paper and slides available upon request.

Presented at the Urban Economics Association, Southern Economics Association, and Western Economics Association International annual meetings in 2021/2022.

Math, Mindset, and Growth: Building Quantitative Competencies in All

Joint work from Ashley E. Orr, Andrew Breazeale, Michael Melville, Elizabeth Whiteman, Sophie le Blanc, and Gladys Perez Sriprasert

Related Teaching and Learning Summit Presentations Fall 2021 (Ashley E. Orr) and Fall 2022 (Ashley E. Orr and Sarah Becker) Presented at SPSSI Conference June 2023. Manuscript draft available by request.

Extended Abstract:

Background and Rationale

Decades of research indicates that quantitative skills are developed through practice and learning and can be built in all learners (Anderson, Boaler, & Dieckmann, 2018). And yet, mathematics is still perceived by some as unapproachable, with requirements and common teaching strategies that may favor “math people” and unintentionally exclude others. A large body of literature provides inspiring evidence on the importance of learner mindsets (pioneered by Dweck, 2000). Learners with a “growth mindset” believe that with effort, practice, and support their skills are malleable and success is possible, regardless of their starting point (Dweck, 2009), whereas folks with “fixed mindsets” believe their intelligence, skills, and characteristics are unchangeable. Believing that their competencies are not likely to change, these learners may not invest sufficient time or effort in developing their skills.

There are many advantages of a growth mindset, specifically in STEM education, as a mechanism to promote equity and access to the scientific workforce (LaCosse, et al., 2021). Recent research has further revealed that growth mindset interventions have the highest potential for impact in settings where students/participants face consequential challenges and are provided with the tools which enable their potential for change (Yeager & Dweck, 2020). These characteristics describe the exact setting of this joint research at Carnegie Mellon University, where we implemented a menu of growth mindset teaching strategies in the mathematics and probability courses, which are a required condition of admission for some incoming master’s students to The Heinz College of Information Systems and Public Policy.

Methods

As part of the research, our team set out with a goal of developing and implementing classroom and course culture interventions that would cultivate a growth mindset in this interdisciplinary entry-level graduate student population. These interventions included a growth mindset training developed by our teaching center colleagues and co-authors, in addition to a menu of growth mindset teaching strategies that were implemented by the two PhD Student Instructors of Record for courses on preparatory mathematics (Ashley Orr) and probability for statistics (Andrew Breazeale). This intervention was implemented three times once during each academic year (AY) 2021, AY 2022, and AY 2023. Our paper describes what interventions we incorporated, how other instructors or trainers might also leverage these strategies, and how we assessed their impact on the students we taught. These students include working professionals and students from diverse baccalaureate degree programs with a wide range of quantitative requirements/preparation. Uniquely these courses provide an opportunity for incoming students to refresh and/or scale up their quantitative skills in preparation for the quantitatively rigorous core curricula they experience during their master’s degree programs within the Heinz College.

Strategies used include the growth mindset training, norm setting, near-peer mentoring, low-stakes practice opportunities, detailed growth-oriented feedback, robust student support, and growth-oriented communication. Each strategy crucially reinforced a culture supporting growth, valuing mistakes as learning opportunities, and appreciating student effort. Additionally, implementation of these strategies allowed the instructors and their teaching teams to practice, grow, and exhibit their own mindsets. To examine the effect of these interventions, we compare student pre-course and post-course assessments. We also examine student feedback, term projects, and reflections of the teaching teams. Finally, we follow up with students longitudinally.

Empirical Results

We investigated the effectiveness of our growth mindset interventions and teaching methods by comparing students' mindset, self-evaluation of confidence, and performance before and after the courses. The student mindset survey used questions adapted from Dweck, 2000, and found incoming students on average already had mindsets oriented towards growth when entering the courses. However, we show growth mindset development even among students who were initially growth oriented. The self-efficacy or self-confidence evaluations were tightly linked to each courses’ learning objectives and, as anticipated and is standard for incoming students to a course, students were not exceptionally confident in their ability to meet the learning objectives prior to the course. We show large and statistically significant improvements in student self-efficacy and student performance following the courses. For instance, within the mathematics course, improvements of between 36 - 39 percentage points were found on average. Importantly these assessments included authentic problems which were related to the learning objectives of the course but were previously unseen by the students. We test and show the robustness of these results within two additional cohorts of similar student populations.

Significance and Broader Application

We find large and statistically significant improvements in students' self confidence evaluations and performance. These results suggest the classes and interventions employed sufficiently supported students' learning and development. Importantly, the strategies of growth mindset training, detailed growth-oriented feedback, and growth-oriented communication are not unique to the college classroom or population we taught. For instance, these methods could be leveraged by managers and trainers for on-the-job training or in any context where success is the result of an iterative process and requires participants to learn, grow, and practice their skills.

We conclude by describing ways to continue to support a growth mindset oriented STEM workforce via formal education, training, or the creation of a field culture which acknowledges the malleability of skills amongst all participants. We acknowledge how growth mindset interventions are generally low cost and scalable to large groups and organizations. We argue that growth mindset strategies have great potential to include and retain students and workers who may be marginalized or limited by other’s (or their own) inaccurate assessment of their intelligence or potential as a fixed trait.

Keywords:

Growth mindset, STEM education, teaching strategies, workforce development