Carol Dweck: Mindset

       Carol Dweck claims that individuals have fixed mindsets or growth mindsets. People often call this dichotomy nature versus nurture. Reading about Dweck’s theory that intelligence is constantly changing and growing based on effort, I realized that I am of both mindsets. My actions in life clearly demonstrate that I am driven almost unconsciously by the growth mindset. However, the negative tapes that sometimes play in my head are from the fixed mindset. This is my double-edged sword.  One voice says, “I want to be a whole lot smarter than is possible for my brain.” Another voice says, “I want to be a whole lot smarter than I am right now.”  The latter propels forward, and the former discourages effort.

Fortunately, I have had good role models, so I am constantly moving forward in spite of myself.  In addition, I have been in a university setting as long as I can remember, so my preferred environment is growth. I am drawn to growth. A very good way to reinforce this mindset is to share it with my students. They must push through many walls to grow as language learners. A fixed mindset has no place in language learning.

It is very obvious which students are striving for an almost impossible level of perfection. They are fixed on what they want to achieve and are often misguided in their approach. In language learning, perfection is seldom achieved. Adults inevitably associate language with intelligence. That begs the question who are we when we no longer have fluent language at our disposal—our clever turn of phrase? We have temporarily lost the ability to express our innermost thoughts, our personality. Limited language ability often takes adults so far out of their comfort zone that many interesting phenomena occur.

This is an ideal opportunity to share experiences and confront hurdles. There is a huge tendency for adults to withdraw and become passive language learners. This is a daily battle in the classroom. The challenge is how to create a language-learning community that is student centered, feels safe and inspires growth. In addition, relevant activities must be devised that bring on the implementation of certain speech acts while not seeming contrived. Students’ affective filter must be lowered, so they feel free to communicate. Substance should initially take precedence over form. Structure is important, but communicating content comes first. If one does not feel encouraged to communicate, a type of language fossilization occurs. Things become fixed.

I sometimes look around the room and see a group of students frozen around the pool and no one is taking the leap into the water. As language teachers we have the choice of continuing to open the tops of our students’ heads and pour in more bits of language. We begin at chapter one and finish at chapter ten, whether relevant or not—that is the curriculum. It’s fixed.

The other choice we have is to make students aware of their psycholinguistic processes, which, are profound, and discuss them. Then we need to confront the issue of passive versus active language learning—how best to grow. Oral implementation of the language can only be achieved in one fashion—by speaking. Once students begin to realize this is their only path to fluency, they come to understand they cannot skirt the fire. They must walk through it to grow. With this knowledge students who experience frustrated fluency begin to understand the dynamics of their own brain and the unavoidable process one endures when learning another language as an adult. Adults must fight their tendency to enter the language rut of a fixed mindset. They will find their experience much more rewarding if they are of the mindset that their language will continue to grow for years to come.