How can learners’ attitudes and dispositions towards mathematics be improved and maths anxiety reduced?
Positive attitudes and dispositions are important to the successful learning of mathematics. However, many learners are not confident in mathematics. There is limited evidence on the efficacy of approaches that might improve learners’
attitudes to mathematics or prevent or reduce the more severe problems of maths anxiety. Encouraging a growth mindset rather than a fixed mindset is unlikely to have a negative impact on learning and may have a small positive impact.
Strength of evidence: LOW
Findings
In Section 3 of this document, we described how attitudes and dispositions are important to learning and doing mathematics. In a meta-analysis of US studies, Ma and Kishnor (1997) found that attitudes appear to have a small causal effect on attainment (r=0.08), whereas the opposite appears not to be the case. However, the meta-analysis was based on causal modelling of just five, albeit large,
naturalistic studies. Ma & Kishnor’s (1997) finding suggests that improving student attitudes towards mathematics may have a small impact on attainment.
International survey evidence appears to contradict the common view that attitudes are more negative in England in comparison to other countries internationally. Evidence from the latest TIMSS and PISA surveys indicate that attitudes to
mathematics amongst learners in England are above the international average and similar to those of the highest-attaining countries. Attitudes follow the general international pattern in declining over time (see Section 3). In TIMSS 2015, the overall proportion of learners who were either confident or very confident in
mathematics was 80% at Year 5 and 65% at Year 9 (Greany et al., 2016). In PISA 2012, at age 15, almost all learners in England agreed or strongly agreed with the statement, “If I put in enough effort I can succeed in mathematics” (96% compared to an international average of 92%) (Wheater et al., 2014). However, the
international studies indicate that, amongst learners within England and other countries, there is a relationship between attitudes and attainment, with lower
attainers tending to have more negative attitudes. The TIMSS 2015 survey collected evidence on confidence and enjoyment (or liking mathematics) as well as whether learners valued mathematics or perceived their mathematics teaching to be
engaging. This evidence indicates that, in England and internationally, the
association between student attainment and attitudes was strongest for confidence and enjoyment, particularly at Year 9 (Greany et al., 2016).
We found surprisingly little evidence demonstrating effective approaches to improving attitudes. Muenks and Miele’s (Forthcoming) research synthesis
examined learners’ perceptions of the relationship between effort and ability. They found that some teacher actions, such as a challenge to “think deeply” (Middleton & Midgeley, 2002, p. 386) and the promotion of an incremental, or malleable, theory of intelligence, appear to encourage learners to believe that increased effort will
increase their own abilities, whereas social comparison and competition tend not to encourage a positive relationship (see also Middleton & Spanias, 1999). Lazowski and Hulleman’s (2016) meta-analysis found a moderate ES for a range of research-
based approaches aimed at increasing motivation (d=0.49), although these effects were across school subjects rather than mathematics-specific. They concluded by suggesting that the benefits of motivational interventions may potentially be
considerable at minimal cost. However, they observe that existing approaches have largely only been evaluated in experimental settings and that translating these experimental approaches into research-based interventions that can be
implemented by teachers is at a very early stage of development. (See also Metacognition and Parental Engagement modules for related strategies.)
In recent years, the importance of learners adopting a growth mindset has been widely promoted by teachers and schools in England, particularly in mathematics (Boaler 2013; see Simms, 2016, for a critique). Muenks and Miele (Forthcoming) suggest that some growth mindset interventions appear promising. However, this intervention-based research is at a very early stage of development, and, whilst some studies have shown small benefits for some learners (e.g., Paunesku et al., 2015), other studies have not shown statistically significant benefits (e.g., Churches, 2016; Paunesku et al., 2011a, 2011b; Rienzo et al., 2015). This suggests that the promotion of a growth mindset is unlikely to have a negative impact on learning and may have a small positive impact in some contexts.
Maths anxiety is defined as “a feeling of tension and anxiety that interferes with the manipulation of numbers and the solving of mathematical problems” (Richardson & Suinn, cited in Dowker et al., 2016, p. 1). Although correlated with attitudes and learner self-concept, maths anxiety is distinct from attitudes, such as confidence in and liking of mathematics. Maths anxiety has a larger detrimental impact on
attainment than attitudes in general, by disrupting working memory and through avoidance of mathematical activities (Dowker et al., 2016; see also studies cited in Dowker et al., 2016, including Ma, 1999). However, in their synthesis of the
research evidence, Dowker et al. conclude that the causal relationships between maths anxiety and attainment are not well understood and, whilst there is some promising research, there is only a limited understanding of how to reduce maths anxiety. Hembree’s (1990) meta-analysis indicated some promising approaches to reducing maths anxiety and raising attainment, including systematic desensitisation, or graduated exposure therapy. However, these approaches were largely evaluated with college students in the US and do not provide practical guidance for
mathematics classrooms in England. Whilst Dowker et al. (2016) highlight some promising approaches to addressing maths anxiety, these are at an early stage of development and more research is needed to address this issue.
Evidence base
As noted in the findings, the evidence base on approaches either to improving attitudes and dispositions or to reduce maths anxiety is very limited.
Meta-analysis Focus k Quality Date Range
Hembree Maths anxiety 13 2 Not given
(1990)
Lazowski & Motivation 92 3 Prior to May 2015 Hulleman
(2016)
Ma & Kishor Relationship 113 2 1966-1993 (1997) between
attitude and attainment Directness
Threat to directness Grade Notes
Where and when the 2 Many of the studies were carried out in the studies were carried US.
out
How the intervention 1 All the meta-analyses and syntheses
was defined and comment that, whilst studies are promising, operationalised much more work needs to be done to enable
implementation with fidelity by teachers. Any reasons for 2 Many of the interventions were delivered by possible ES inflation researchers rather than in regular
classrooms. Any focus on 2
particular topic areas
Age of participants 2 Many of the original studies in Hembree (1990) were carried out with college students.
Overview of effects
Meta- Effect No of Comment analysis Size studies
(d) (k)
Effect of interventions to increase motivation on attainment
Lazowski 0.49 92 Synthesises a range of interventions based on & 95% different theoretical approaches, all aimed at Hulleman CI improving motivation. (However, this is across (2016) [0.43, subjects in general; i.e., not focused on
0.56] mathematics, and there is no moderator analysis for different subjects).
Average effects for different approaches varying from d=0.36 to d=0.74.
Effect of interventions to reduce maths anxiety on attainment and maths
anxiety
Hembree See - Effects on maths anxiety:
(1990) com- d=-1.04 (Systematic desensitisation only, ments.
k=18)
d=-0.51 (Cognitive restructuring only, k=14) d=-1.15 (Cognitive-behavioural approaches, ie both together, k=10)
Effects on attainment:
d=0.60 (Systematic desensitisation only, k=12) d=0.32 (Cognitive restructuring only, k=7) d=0.50 (Cognitive-behavioural approaches, i.e. both together, k=4)
Relationship between attitude and attainment in mathematics
Ma & See Correlation between attitudes and attainment: Kishor com- r=0.12, 95% CI [0.12, 0.13], k=107
(1997) ments. (N=59,925).
Causal relationship attitudes to attainment: r=0.08, 95% CI [0.07, 0.09], k=5 (N=20,227). Causal relationship attainment to attitudes: r=0.00, 95% CI [-0.01, 0.01], k=5 (N=20,227). References
Meta-analyses included
Hembree, R. (1990). The nature, effects, and relief of mathematics anxiety. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 21(1), 33-46.
Lazowski, R. A., & Hulleman, C. S. (2016). Motivation Interventions in Education. Review of Educational Research, 86(2), 602-640.
doi:doi:10.3102/0034654315617832
Ma, X., & Kishor, N. (1997). Assessing the relationship between attitude toward mathematics and achievement in mathematics: a meta-analysis. Journal for Research In Mathematics Education, 28(1), 26-47.
Secondary meta-analysis
Ma, X. (1999). A meta-analysis of the relationship between anxiety toward mathematics and achievement in mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30(5), 520-540.
Research syntheses
Dowker, A., Sarkar, A., & Looi, C. Y. (2016). Mathematics Anxiety: What Have We Learned in 60 Years? Frontiers in Psychology, 7(508).
doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00508.
Middleton, J. A., & Spanias, P. A. (1999). Motivation for achievement in
mathematics: Findings, generalizations and criticisms of the research. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30(1), 65-88.
Muenks, K., & Miele, D. B. (Forthcoming, online first). Students’ Thinking About Effort and Ability. Review of Educational Research, 0034654316689328. doi: 10.3102/0034654316689328
Other references
Boaler, J. (2013). Ability and Mathematics: the mindset revolution that is reshaping education. Forum, 55(1), 143-152.
Churches, R. (2016). Closing the gap: test and learn. London: Department for Education.
Greany, T., Barnes, I., Mostafa, T., Pesniero, N., & Swenson, C. (2016). Trends in Maths and Science Study (TIMSS): National Report for England. London: Department for Education.
Middleton, M. J., & Midgley, C. (2002). Beyond Motivation: Middle School Students' Perceptions of Press for Understanding in Math. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27(3), 373-391. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/ceps.2001.1101
Paunesku, D., Walton, G. M., Romero, C., Smith, E. N., Yeager, D. S., & Dweck, C. S. (2015). Mind-Set Interventions Are a Scalable Treatment for Academic Underachievement. Psychological Science. doi:10.1177/0956797615571017 Paunesku, D., Goldman, D., & Dweck, C. S. (2011). Secondary School Mindset
Study. Glasgow: The Centre for Confidence & Well-being.
Paunesku, D., Goldman, D., & Dweck, C. S. (2011). East Renfrewshire Growth Mindset Study. Glasgow: The Centre for Confidence & Well-being.
Rienzo, C., Rolfe, H., & Wilkinson, D. (2015). Changing mindsets: Evaluation report and executive summary. London: Education Endowment Foundation.
Simms, V. (2016). Mathematical mindsets: unleashing students’ potential through creative math, inspiring messages and innovative teaching. Research in Mathematics Education, 18(3), 317-320.
doi:10.1080/14794802.2016.1237374
Wheater, R., Ager, R., Burge, B., & Sizmur, J. (2014). Achievement of 15-Year-Olds in England: PISA 2012 National Report (OECD Programme for International Student Assessment) [Revised Version, April 2014]. London: Department for Education.