A growth-theory-of-interest intervention helps align science students with a new multidisciplinary curriculum

Abstract

What happens when well-intentioned changes to curricula clash with students’ pre-existing academic identity? In the present study, students entered a two-year pre-university school strongly identified with science but not arts—an identity that did not fit with their school’s new multidisciplinary curriculum that mandated engagement with both academic areas. We investigated the efficacy of a growth-theory-of-interest intervention (O’Keefe et al., 2023)—which promoted the view that academic interests are developed rather than inherent and fixed—in helping students reap the benefits of the new curriculum. We conducted a randomized controlled field experiment with incoming students who overwhelmingly identified as interested in science but not arts (N = 151). Before matriculating, students were randomly assigned to complete the growth-theory-of-interest intervention or active-control materials. Approximately 7 months later, students in the intervention condition reported a stronger arts identity (without diminishing their science identity), and stronger fit and belonging in school, relative to the active control condition. Moreover, whereas developing a stronger arts identity was associated with lower belonging in the control condition, this drop was eliminated in the intervention condition. Finally, by improving students’ school belonging, the intervention indirectly predicted higher year-end GPAs. The results underscore the intervention’s efficacy in promoting a mindset conducive to multidisciplinary learning and facilitating students’ fit and belonging within a curriculum intended to enrich their educational experiences and future career prospects.