翻譯自《TOP 20 PRINCIPLES FROM PSYCHOLOGY FOR PreK–12 TEACHING AND LEARNING》American Psychological Association
原則一：
學生對于智力和能力的信念和觀點埠通，影響了他們的認知功能和學習
解釋：
認為智力具有可塑性并且可以改變的學生，更有可能堅持在智力上的“成長型思維”（“incremental” or “growth” mind-set ）饱苟。
Students who believe intelligence is malleable and not fixed are more likely to adhere to an “incremental” or
“growth” mind-set about intelligence.?
那些有著相反的觀點寇损，認為智力是固定不變的學生供置，更可能堅持在智力上的“實體理論”（?“entity” theory）。
Those who hold the opposite view, that intelligence is a fixed trait,? tend to adhere to the “entity” theory of intelligence.?
持有后一種觀點的學生，專注于自己的表現(xiàn)好壞并相信他們需要持續(xù)的展示出并證明他們的智力阵面，這使得他們比那些有著“成長型思維”的人更猶豫于做高挑戰(zhàn)性的工作绣否，面對消極的評價時更脆弱誊涯。
Students holding to the latter view focus on performance goals and believe they continually need to demonstrate and prove their intelligence, making them more hesitant to take on highly challenging tasks and more vulnerable to negative feedback than students holding an incremental view.?
有著成長型思維的學生普遍更專注于學習的目標也更有意愿去做有挑戰(zhàn)性的工作為了測試和提高（與自我防御式的證明相反）他們的智力和能力。
Students with an incremental mind-set generally focus on learning goals and are more willing to take on challenging tasks in an effort to test and expand (as opposed to defensively prove) their intelligence or ability.
因此蒜撮，他們更容易從消極的反饋和失敗中恢復暴构。
Hence, they rebound more easily from negative feedback and failure.
相應地，認為智力和能力能夠提升的學生段磨，往往會在種種認知測試和面對要解決問題的情況時表現(xiàn)得更好取逾。
Accordingly, students who believe that intelligence and ability can be enhanced tend to perform better on a variety of cognitive tasks and in problem-solving situations.
一種經(jīng)過實證的培養(yǎng)成長型思維的方式，是依據(jù)教師對于學生表現(xiàn)的歸因而構(gòu)建起來的苹支。
One evidence-based approach to fostering a growth mind-set is framed in terms of the attributions teachers assign to student performance.?
當學生經(jīng)歷失敗時砾隅，他們可能會問“為什么？”
When students experience failure, they are likely to ask “why?”?
這個問題的答案是一種因果歸因
The answer to that question is a causal attribution.?
因果歸因和成長型思維和實體思維有關(guān)债蜜，分別地晴埂，將有動力的學生從沒有動力的學生中區(qū)分出來。
Causal attributions, which relate to growth and entity mind-sets, respectively, distinguish motivated from unmotivated students.?
如果歸因于是能力不行（“我失敗了是因為我不夠聰明”）則是認為智力是確定的寻定。
Attributions that tend to blame one’s ability (“I failed because I’m just not smart enough”) are associated with the view that intelligence is fixed.
反過來講儒洛，歸因于不夠努力（“我失敗是由于我不夠刻苦”）通常是認為智力是具有可塑性的。
In contrast, attributions that blame lack of effort (“I failed because I didn’t try hard enough”) generally reflect an incremental or growth view of intelligence.
當將失敗歸因于缺乏努力而不是能力差時狼速，學生能夠好的面對失敗琅锻，因為前者是易變的（努力會隨著時間波動）和可控的（學生能夠更加努力如果他們想的話）。
Students are better able to cope when failure is attributed? to a lack of effort rather than to low ability because the former is unstable (effort fluctuates over time) and controllable (students can generally try harder if they want to)
參考文獻：
Aronson, J., Fried, C., & Good, C. (2002). Reducing the effects
of stereotype threat on African American college students by
shaping theories of intelligence. Journal of Experimental Social
Psychology, 38, 113–125. doi:10.1006/jesp.2001.1491
Aronson, J., & Juarez, L. (2012). Growth mindsets in the labora
tory and the real world. In R. F. Subotnik, A. Robinson, C. M.
Callahan, & E. J. Gubbins (Eds.), Malleable minds: Translating
insights from psychology and neuroscience to gifted education
(pp. 19–36). Storrs, CT: National Research Center on the Gifted
and Talented.
Blackwell, L. S., Trzesniewski, K. H., & Dweck, C. S. (2007). Im
plicit theories of intelligence predict achievement across an
adolescent transition: A longitudinal study and an interven
tion. Child Development, 78(1), 246–263. doi:10.1111/j.1467-
8624.2007.00995.x
Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success.
New York, NY: Random House.
Good, C., Aronson, J., & Inzlicht, M. (2003). Improving
adolescents’ standardized test performance: An intervention
to reduce the effects of stereotype threat. Journal of Applied
Developmental Psychology, 24, 645–662. doi.org/10.1016
/j.appdev.2003.09.002
