The differences between students’ fixed and growth mindsets: a case of study tour between Hong Kong and Canada

1Citations
Citations of this article
38Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Purpose: The paper aims to address the gap in the literature related to students’ mindsets and learning activities through investigation of the differences in students’ expectations of, feelings towards, and perceptions of an overseas study tour based on their mindset. The study provides an in-depth analysis of students with different mindsets and proposes the use of overseas tours and intercultural learning to foster students’ growth mindset. Design/methodology/approach: An overseas study tour hosted by a self-financing tertiary institution in Hong Kong was selected for investigation. 13 sub-degree students participated in the study tour during the summer term in 2018. Two types of primary data – quantitative (i.e., a questionnaire survey) and qualitative (i.e., in-depth interviews) – of fixed mindset and growth mindset students were collected for analysis. Findings: The findings indicate differences in students’ expectations of, feelings towards, and perceptions of an overseas study tour depending on whether they demonstrate a fixed or growth mindset. The growth mindset students had more and higher expectations of the study tour, all of which were related to personal growth and development. The fixed mindset students did not have as much of a desire for personal development and their expectations were easily met. Both growth and fixed mindset students had positive feelings and perceptions of the tour. Originality/value: Research on the application value of overseas study tours in helping students from self-financing tertiary institutions develop a growth mindset is scarce, and thus warrants further investigation.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Sum, C., Lau, Y. yip, & Chan, I. (2022). The differences between students’ fixed and growth mindsets: a case of study tour between Hong Kong and Canada. Public Administration and Policy, 25(3), 235–249. https://doi.org/10.1108/PAP-03-2022-0022

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free