IMuscle

IMUScLE is a quasi-experimental study that tested the independent and combined effects of ability beliefs and utility value for adolescent boys and girls. The study was conducted in 24 7^th and 9^th grade science classrooms in a large diverse school district (N=600 students). Classrooms were assigned to one of four treatment groups, with treatments lasting 6 weeks:

1.) A web-based mindset treatment (Brainology™) designed to promote the belief that ability can grow, and is not fixed

2.) A utility value treatment designed to increase students’ awareness of the usefulness of classroom content through a simple writing task

3.) A mindset+utility treatment, in which the treatments described in 1 & 2 above are administered simultaneously

IMUSCLE 2 IS A HIGHLY VISUAL, 3D-BASED, AWARD WINNING HEALTH AND FITNESS APP THAT HAS EVERYTHING YOU NEED TO PLAN AND TRACK YOUR FITNESS PROGRAM. ⁃Chosen by the App Store as 'App of the Week' ⁃No.1 Health & Fitness app - App Store Rewind ⁃Listed as one of Tech Crunch's top 20 apps.
IMuscle SARMS biedt de beste kwaliteit SARMS in Nederland en Europa, met duizenden 5 sterren reviews. Onze hoge kwaliteit SARMS worden getest door een derde partij in een onafhankelijk laboratorium. Gratis verzending voor bestellingen van meer dan €70.
Εδώ θα βρείτε όλα τα εκπληκτικά προϊόντα sarms της εταιρείας imuscle. Μία πλήρη ολοκληρωμένη σειρά κωδικών για την επίτευξη κάθε είδους στόχου, ακόμα και των πιο απαιτητικών αγωνιστικών απαιτήσεων για όλους τους αθλητές.

4.) A control group in which students engage in a simple writing task to summarize recent content in science class.

IMuscle SARMS Italia offre SARM testati in un laboratorio europeo. Livelli di purezza superiori al 98%. I nostri prodotti SARM sono fabbricati da un'azienda farmaceutica. IMuscle SARMs UK offer High Quality Selective Androgen Receptor Modulators. Our certified SARMs products are made with High Quality and Pure Active ingredient ranging from 97.5 – 99.9%. SARMs are The Future of Fitness because, unlike steroids, they stimulate androgen receptors in muscle and bone without affecting other cells.

Using data from surveys, observation, experience sampling techniques, and school records, we examined the impact of these various treatments on student engagement, achievement, and interest in science, testing for differential effects by gender and grade level.

Muscle Milk

The material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No: HRD-1136143. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.

Background

IMUScLE was guided by Expectancy Value Theory (Eccles et al, 1983), a framework for understanding adolescents’ performance and motivation in mathematics. This theory, which has been revised in recent years (Wigfield & Eccles, 2000, 2002) proposes that children’s achievement performance, persistence, and academic choices are most directly predicted by two general factors: 1) their expectancies for success in those tasks; and 2) the subjective value they place on those tasks. Empirical tests of the expectancy-value model (Eccles & Wigfield, 1995; Eccles et al, 1993) showed that ability beliefs and expectancies for success (initially proposed as two separate components) were not empirically distinguishable from one another. Thus, the IMUScLE study focused on ability beliefs.

In the expectancy-value model, subjective task values are distinct from ability beliefs and are defined as how a task might meet different needs of individuals. A task may be valuable for a variety of reasons. Eccles and colleagues provide evidence that different components of task value become differentiated by early adolescence. The theory specifies four types of subjective values: attainment value (importance of doing well), intrinsic value (enjoyment), utility value (usefulness to one’s life), and cost (what one has to give up in order to engage in a task).

Ability Beliefs

Imuscle For Android

The IMUScLE study assessed two types of ability beliefs: perceptions of competence and mindset. Perceptions of competence refer to individuals’ beliefs about their own competence in a particular domain as ‘low’ or ‘high’ (Wigfield & Eccles, 2000), while mindset refers to individuals’ beliefs about the nature of ability in a particular domain as being fixed or capable of growth (resulting in the terms ‘fixed mindset’ and ‘growth mindset’).

Perceived competence. Motivation researchers have shown repeatedly that perceiving the self as competent is critical for successful performance within a domain (Bandura, 1997; Csikszentmihalyi, 1990; Eccles et al., 1998; Meece et al., 1990; Wigfield & Eccles, 1992). Consistent gender differences in competence beliefs have been observed in gender-role stereotyped domains like sports and STEM subject areas, even after all relevant skill-level differences are controlled (Schmidt, et al., 2011; Wigfield et al., 1997, 2002). Elementary and middle school students evidence few gender gaps in perceived competence: These differences emerge most strongly in high school (Andre et al, 1999; Greenfield, 1997). Thus we considered age when examining gender and ability beliefs.

Mindset. Carol Dweck has shown that students with varying levels of competence can differ in whether they see ability as fixed or as expandable. . A “fixed mindset” refers to the belief that ability does not grow: Individuals are endowed with a certain level of capability that is not easily transcended. It is this mindset, combined with perceptions of low competence, that results in comments like “I am not a science person,” or “I just don’t get science.” Importantly, a fixed mindset is a liability even for individuals with high competence beliefs because difficult work is interpreted as a threat to one’s self-perception rather than as an opportunity for development. A “growth mindset”, on the other hand, refers to the belief that ability is expandable and can develop with practice. Dweck (1999, 2006b) reported that high-performing girls are especially likely to have a fixed mindset, indicating a gender difference that was also found in the SciMo study.

Utility Value:

According to the expectancy-value model, students’ perceptions of tasks vary on a continuum of utility value (e.g., Eccles et al., 1983; Eccles & Wigfield, 2002). Tasks perceived as having low utility are seen as unrelated to short-term or long-term goals. In contrast, high utility tasks are seen as instrumental to achieving other goals. In this way, perceptions of utility value can link the activities in which individuals engage to their personal aspirations and developing identities. Whereas students who perceive low utility in their schoolwork do not connect their academic behaviors to their lives in general, students who perceive high utility in their schoolwork interpret their academic behaviors as being essential to their larger plans for personal growth (Simons, DeWitte, & Lens, 2004).

IMUScLE builds on key findings from the SciMo study that indicate that females achieved as well as or better than males in high school science but females tended to feel less competent than males in science classes. SciMo also found that female students tended to disengage when challenged in science and reported similar momentary interest but less long term interest in science than males. Both males and females saw little relevance in their science activities and teachers missed many opportunities to highlight the value of science and growth mindset.

Interventions

Mindset Treatment: To manipulate mindset, we used the Brainology™ program (http://www.brainology.us/). Brainology™ is a web-based tutorial featuring 2 adolescent cartoon characters: a male and a female who are struggling academically. The treatment includes 6 web-based units (an introduction and five 40 minute sessions) spread over 6 weeks (1 day per week). Using scientific data and interactive activities, units teach students that the brain is a muscle and can grow. The program also includes teacher education activities, which will take place on teacher in-service days immediately preceding the introduction of the treatments.
Utility Value Treatment: Once a week for a period of 6 weeks, students were prompted at the end of science class to write 5 sentences or more about the usefulness of the day’s topic to their life (utility value). This writing task took approximately 5-10 minutes to complete. Researchers collected these statements and will ask teachers not to discuss them with their students so that teachers are not aware of whether their students are in the treatment or control group, which also involved a writing task (see below). Similar treatments have been found to have effects on interest & achievement in undergraduate populations, though mostly in subjects other than science (Hulleman at al., 2010), and one study has shown similar effects in 9^th grade science classrooms (Hulleman & Harackiewicz, 2009).
Mindset + Utility Treatment: Students received both of the treatments described above. Both treatments occurred in the same 6-week period but the treatments themselves did not occur on the same day. The order of these 2 treatments were assigned at random such that half of the classrooms got a utility-mindset sequence and the other half got a mindset-utility sequence.
Control Group: Once a week for 6 weeks, students were given a simple writing task that is unrelated to the 3 treatment groups. At the end of class, students were asked to write 5 sentences or more summarizing what they did in class that day. Researchers collected these statements and asked teachers not to discuss them with their students so that teachers were not aware of whether their students were in the treatment or control group.

Primary Research Questions

Will the mindset and utility treatments cause measurable shifts in students’ mindset and perceived utility value for science relative to a control group?
Does exposure to the mindset treatment result in greater science engagement, science interest, or science achievement and do those associations differ by gender?
Does the utility value treatment impact outcomes and do associations differ by gender?
Does simultaneous exposure to mindset and utility treatments result in greater increases in outcomes than either treatment alone? Do associations differ by gender?
Are relationships identified in questions 1-4 above similar among middle school students and high school students?

Method

Research Participants (Brief Description, for more detail see Full Method Description)

7^th Grade:

15 classrooms

4 teachers, all female and white
Average age was 39.75 years (range from 26-54) and an average 10.75 years of teaching experience (range from 4-20 years).

380 students

Gender: 45% male and 55% female
Race/Ethnicity: 42% Latino, 22% White, 11% African American, 3% Asian, less than 1% Native American, and 22% multiracial
Eligible for free/reduced lunch: 61%
Parents’ education: 44% neither parent attained a college degree, 12% at least one parent had attained a college degree, 11% at least one parent earned an advanced degree, 33% did not know their parents’ educational attainment.

9^th Grade:

15 classrooms

6 teachers (2 co-taught one class), 5 female and 1 male, all white.
Average age was 37.33 years (range from __-59) and an average 6.41 years of teaching experience (range from 2-10 years).

Imuscle For Pc

358 students

Gender: 54% male and 46% female
Race/Ethnicity: 56% Latino, 14% White, 13% African American, less than 1% Asian, less than 1% Native American, and 15% multiracial
Eligible for free/reduced lunch: __
Parents’ education: 57% neither parent attained a college degree, 12% at least one parent had attained a college degree, 9% at least one parent earned an advanced degree, 22% did not know their parents’ educational attainment.

Procedure & Measures (Brief Description, for more detail see Full Method Description)

Brainology Intervention. The Brainology intervention consisted of an interactive online software program based on Carol Dweck’s mindset research. Students participated in the interactive program for six weeks, which included brain science education as well as information on study skills. The program was completed either in the school’s computer lab or using laptops in the science classroom, depending on available resources for that class. One full class period per week was devoted to the program, supplemented by brief homework assignments or additional in-class activities on other days. Each week, the program included an opening activity led by one of the IMUScLE researchers, followed by the computer module section. Students were required to apply their Brainology content knowledge during the module, and were also given frequent opportunities to reflect on the material in an “e-journal” during the computer module component. Following the completion of the module, students were given a follow-up activity (this was completed as homework if they did not finish in class). In addition, participant teachers selected additional supplementary activities from the Brainology teachers’ manual to reinforce relevant concepts during the week.

Utility Value Treatment. Once a week for a period of 6 weeks, students were prompted at the end of science class to write 5 sentences or more about the usefulness of the day’s topic to their life (utility value). A control group of students also completed a writing task where they were asked to write 5 sentences or more summarizing what they did in class that day. The writing task in both conditions took approximately 10-15 minutes to complete. Researchers collected these statements and teachers did not discuss the writing task with their students, so that teachers were not aware of whether their students were in the treatment or control group.

Survey data was collected from students before the intervention, after the intervention, and at the end of the school year. The surveys measured student mindset, learning goals, utility value beliefs, science interest, success expectancies, perceived competence, and occupational aspirations.

Experience Sampling Method (ESM) During each year of data collection, students’ subjective experience in each science classroom was measured repeatedly using a variant of the Experience Sampling Method (ESM; Csikszentmihalyi & Larson, 1987). Following the day’s lesson, students completed an Experience Sampling Form (ESF) in which they were prompted to “think about their work in class today” and report on several dimensions of their subjective motivational and affective experience using Likert scales. The ESFs took approximately 3 minutes to complete, and were administered 11 times in each year; 2 times before treatment, once per week during the 6-week treatment period, and once per month for 3 months following treatment completion.

Classroom Observations. Researchers collected field notes indicating the type of activity (teacher presentation, individual student seatwork, group seatwork, test/quiz, whole class discussion, student presentations/demonstrations, video/movie, lab work, non-instructional time, and off-task activity), time the activity began, and when the activity code changed. Researchers also recorded concepts and content of the science activities, collected handouts, and noted textbook page numbers that students were working in.

Utility events. Observers recorded instances during the class which pertained to any type of value statement that was made about science (utility, attainment, intrinsic, cost values). Both the initiator and referent audience were noted. In describing the event, observers recorded multiple aspects of it including: (a) whether the instance referred to science generally (“science is fun”) or to a specific topic in science (e.g. humidity, Newton’s first law); (b) to whom it was identified as of value; (c) when the value accrued or would accrue (e.g. past, shortly, long term); (d) in what way it was of value (e.g. career, health, school, hobbies), and (c) the general relationship between science and usefulness (relationship exists, passive value, achieves a particular goal). The field notes were coded so that any change in the type of value, type of utility, the initiator, or the referent audience signaled a new event.

Mindset events. Observers also recorded instances during the class which pertained to any type of mindset statement (about the nature of ability and explanations for learning and performance). Both the initiator and referent audience were noted. In describing the event observers noted statements about ability, intelligence, performance, effort, improvement, learning strategies, response to level of difficulty.

Global ratings by activity. For each instructional activity except non-instructional and off task, five ratings were made: On Task (referring to the percentage of students who appear to be on task during the classroom activity), Instruction Relative to Academic skill level of class, Conceptual Development, Direct Instruction, and Instructional Feedback.

Global ratings by class period. Each teacher rated each class period observed for typicality. Rating ranged from 1 (not all typical) to 5 (very typical). Observers rated three aspects of the overall classroom environment during the class period observed: Emotional climate, Productivity/Organization, and Teacher enthusiasm

School records. Information collected from school records during the 3 years of the project include whether they received free and reduced lunches, if they were gifted students, or if they had Individual Educational Plans (IEPS) and students’ absences from school. Students’ quarterly grades, annual test scores and scores from the ISAT and IL Student achievement PSAE (7th and 11th grade) EXPLORE (9th grade), PLAN (10th grade) and ACT (11th grade) were also collected. Science courses the students took during the time of the study were noted and a measure of science interest was derived from that record.

Teacher Survey. Prior to the start of data collection in classrooms, participant teachers completed a survey in which they provided information about their demographic characteristics, professional training, and current teaching assignment. Also included in the survey were a series of questions to assess mindset, learning goals, and positive beliefs about effort and a number of questions about male vs. female students in science.

Teacher Interviews. Following the completion of the 6-week treatment, each teacher participated in a one-on-one interview, which was audio-recorded. In addition to discussing their impressions of the various treatments that were administered in their classrooms, teachers were also asked to discuss the themes they felt were important in the units that had been observed and whether they observed gender differences in science interest, aptitude, or achievement.

Project Timeline

Year 1: September 2011 – June 2012, 7^th grade treatment implementation and data collection

Muscle Relaxers

June 2012 – August 2012, data entry and data coding.

Imuscle 2 App

Year 2: September 2012 – June 2013, 9^th grade treatment implementation and data collection

June 2013 – August 2013, data entry and data coding.

Year 3: September 2013 – August 2014

Continued coding, data analysis, writing, and dissemination activities including presenting papers at academic conferences, conducting professional development with science teachers, and submitting manuscripts for publication