Search

Recent studies have suggested that quality of delivery matters to achieve better student outcomes in the context of school interventions. However, studies rarely measure quality of delivery and test its association with students’ outcomes, perhaps due to lack of clarity regarding how to measure it. Here, we offer recommendations on how to select or design measures of quality of delivery. These recommendations focus on identifying teaching practices that help students to develop proximal outcomes during the delivery of an intervention. Additionally, we illustrate an application of these recommendations to the study of quality of delivery in a cluster-randomized efficacy study of Brainology, a program that promotes students’ motivation and learning. We found that, although teachers fluctuated in their quality of delivery across lessons, students who received the intervention with higher quality of delivery on average increased more in targeted proximal outcomes (effort beliefs and learning goals) than students exposed to low quality. We discuss these results in terms of their implications for measuring quality of delivery, supporting teachers, and studying the conditions that make school interventions successful.

Beliefs about the malleability of intellectual ability—mindsets—shape achievement. Recent evidence suggests that even young children hold such mindsets; yet, no reliable and valid instruments exist for measuring individual differences in young children’s mindsets. Here, we developed an instrument for this purpose—the Growth Mindset Scale for Children (GM-C), suitable for children as young as 4. Evidence on US (Study 1; N = 220; 50% girls; 39% White) and South African (Study 2; N = 331; 54% girls; 100% Black) children suggested the GM-C scale has strong internal consistency and test-retest reliability; it is also valid (e.g., GM-C scores predicted learning goals). The GM-C is a reliable, valid, and cross-culturally robust measure of young children’s mindsets.

In the last three decades, positive youth development has emerged as the new paradigm for youth-related research and programming. The literature provides strong evidence that high-quality youth programs can have positive and significant effects. Positive youth development is strongly associated with three outcomes of particular public significance: improved school achievement and graduation rates, decreased incidence of risk behaviors and increased sense of personal efficacy and empathy. A strong economic case could be built for increasing public investment in positive youth development programs. What is needed now is more and better data, and measurable goals at the state level.