| Course | PS 210 Psychology of Child and Adolescence |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 5 |
| Paper type | School and learning application |
| Length | About 1,040 words, 6 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Herzing University |
| Program | BS in Psychology |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for PS 210 Unit 5
"I'm Just Not a Math Person" in Third Grade: Applying Research on Praise, Feedback and Mindset to One Classroom Situation, and Arguing for Process Feedback Over a Poster on the Wall
Student Name
Psychology, Herzing University
PS 210: Psychology of Child and Adolescence
Instructor Name
February 10, 2026
"I'm Just Not a Math Person" in Third Grade: Applying Research on Praise, Feedback and Mindset to One Classroom Situation, and Arguing for Process Feedback Over a Poster on the Wall
The Situation
This classroom and child are invented for the paper. In a third-grade classroom, an eight-year-old who did well in math in second grade has started to give up. On weekly multiplication quizzes he scored well in September, when his teacher praised him as "a natural." Since October, as the facts got harder, his scores have dropped. He now leaves problems blank, says "I'm just not a math person," and asks to do reading instead. His teacher has two ideas: hang a growth mindset poster and run a short lesson on how brains grow, or change how she gives feedback on his work. She can do either within her own classroom. This paper asks which the evidence supports.
Finding 1: Praise for Ability Can Backfire After Failure
Mueller and Dweck (1998) ran a series of experiments with fifth graders. Children worked on problems and were then praised either for their intelligence ("you must be smart at these") or for their effort ("you must have worked hard"). They then met problems that were much harder and performed poorly. Children praised for intelligence were more likely afterward to choose tasks that would make them look smart rather than tasks they could learn from, enjoyed the problems less, persisted less and performed worse on a later set of problems than children praised for effort. The studies involved older children than the student here and a single laboratory session, but the pattern they describe, ability praise followed by a collapse after difficulty, fits his story closely. Being called a natural in September may have taught him that struggling meant he was not one.
Finding 2: Mindset Interventions Have Small Average Effects
The poster and the lesson rest on mindset research, the idea that children who believe ability can grow persist more than those who believe it is fixed. Sisk et al. (2018) conducted two meta-analyses. They found that the relationship between students' mindsets and their academic achievement was weak on average, and that mindset interventions had very small effects on achievement overall, with somewhat larger effects for students from low-income families and students at risk of failing. The evidence does not show that such interventions never help. It does show that a brief message about growing brains, on its own, is unlikely to change much for a typical student.
Finding 3: Feedback Works Best When It Is About the Task and the Process
Hattie and Timperley (2007) reviewed research on feedback in schools and proposed that feedback operates at four levels: about the task (whether an answer is correct), about the process (how the work was done and what strategy would help), about self-regulation (how the learner can monitor their own work) and about the self (praise of the person, such as "good girl" or "you're so smart"). They concluded that comments about strategy and about how learners can check their own work do the most for deeper learning, task feedback is useful when it is specific, and feedback about the self is the least effective, because it says nothing about how to improve.
The Argued Response
Read together, the three findings point the same way. The student's problem began with feedback about the self, praise for being a natural, which Mueller and Dweck's results suggest can leave a child vulnerable once work becomes hard. A poster addresses his beliefs in general, with small average effects according to Sisk et al. (2018). Changing the feedback addresses the specific moment where his discouragement happens: a hard problem and a wrong answer.
The response is therefore to replace praise of the person and bare scores with process feedback. When he gets a problem wrong, the teacher points to the step that went wrong and names a strategy, for example breaking 7 times 8 into 7 times 4 twice. When he gets one right after effort, she names what he did, not what he is. And when she returns quizzes, she marks which facts he now knows and which strategy to practice next, so that the quiz describes progress on a task rather than a verdict on a person. This is something a teacher can do within existing lessons, at no cost, and it acts directly on the mechanism the evidence identifies.
How the Teacher Would Know Whether It Helped
A response worth arguing for should also say what would show it working. Three signs are observable within a few weeks without any special measure. The first is whether he attempts hard problems instead of leaving them blank, which the teacher can count on each quiz. The second is whether he uses the strategies she names, which shows in his written work. The third is what he says: whether "I'm not a math person" gives way to statements about specific facts he has not learned yet. None of these is proof that feedback caused a change, since a single child's improvement could have many causes, but together they would tell the teacher whether to continue, adjust or look for another explanation, such as a gap in earlier learning that feedback alone cannot fix.
Limits of the Argument
The argument has limits. Mueller and Dweck studied older children in a laboratory, and Hattie and Timperley's conclusions come from a review of many studies with varied designs rather than from a test of this exact situation. The student is a composite, and a real child's difficulty could have other causes, such as a gap in understanding from earlier grades or something outside school, which a teacher would want to rule out. Nothing here shows that changing feedback will restore his confidence quickly. It shows only that, among the two options the teacher has, the evidence favors the one aimed at feedback.
What the Situation Teaches
The situation shows how a well-meant habit, praising a child's talent, can interact with ordinary difficulty to produce discouragement, and how research that is popular in schools may promise more than it delivers on average. Applying research well means asking not which idea sounds right, but which finding speaks to the specific moment where the problem occurs.
References
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
Mueller, C. M., & Dweck, C. S. (1998). Praise for intelligence can undermine children's motivation and performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(1), 33-52. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.75.1.33
Sisk, V. F., Burgoyne, A. P., Sun, J., Butler, J. L., & Macnamara, B. N. (2018). To what extent and under which circumstances are growth mind-sets important to academic achievement? Two meta-analyses. Psychological Science, 29(4), 549-571. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617739704
PS 210 Unit 5 instructions, in plain terms
The fifth PS 210 unit asks students to apply research on learning and motivation to a classroom situation at a stated grade level. Expect to describe the situation, bring named findings to bear on it with their designs and populations, and argue for one workable response from the evidence. The response should usually be something a teacher could do in the classroom. Many sections provide a scenario; using it is fine as long as the analysis is your own. Writing up a real child you tutor would share private information about a minor. A composite child built around the research questions is the safer and more useful choice.
Inside the PS 210 Unit 5 example
The sample opens with the composite situation and the teacher's two options. Three findings follow under separate headings: Mueller and Dweck's experiments on ability praise, the meta-analyses of mindset by Sisk and colleagues with their small average effects, and Hattie and Timperley's four levels of feedback. The argued response section shows how the findings converge and specifies process feedback with concrete classroom examples. A section names three observable signs of whether the change helps. A limits section notes differences in age and design and possible other causes. The close draws a general lesson about applying popular research. The response is specified in words a teacher would actually use.
Reading the PS 210 Unit 5 rubric
Herzing's rubric for the school and learning application usually weighs a clearly described situation, findings reported with design and population, a response argued from evidence, practicality for the classroom and an honest account of limits, plus writing. The situation earns credit when grade level and behavior are specific. Findings score when each is described well enough to judge its relevance. The argued response usually decides the grade, favoring papers that choose between options using the evidence. Practicality earns points when a teacher could carry out the response. Limits are credited when the paper notes where the research differs from the situation. Naming how the teacher would know the response helped is often credited.
PS 210 Unit 5 help before you submit
Application papers lose points when they list several interventions without choosing one. Another common weakness is relying on a popular idea, such as a mindset poster, without checking the size of its effects. Students often cite findings without saying who was studied. Some argue from instinct and add citations afterward. Others propose responses no teacher could carry out. Writing about a real child you tutor raises privacy concerns. If you need help turning findings into an argued classroom response, our writers can draft one around your scenario. Choosing a response before reading the evidence, then citing selectively, is a common pattern markers notice. Ignoring the size of an effect is another.
Get a PS 210 Unit 5 example written to your instructions
Start us off with the Unit 5 instructions and your PS 210 rubric, plus any scenario or grade level the assignment supplies. The custom example we return opens on a declared composite, reports findings before using them, argues one response and names its failure conditions. First custom sample free, 24 to 48 hours from your instructions landing with us.
More PS 210 papers and psychology samples
- PS 210 Unit 1: Developmental domains overview
- PS 210 Unit 2: Cognitive development paper
- PS 210 Unit 3: Attachment and family paper
- PS 210 Unit 4: Peer and social influence paper
- PS 210 Unit 6: Behavioral difficulty case
- PS 210 Unit 7: Adolescent development paper
- PS 210 Unit 8: Case analysis with recommendations
- PS 105 Unit 5: Adolescence paper
- PS 130 Unit 5: Informational interview write-up
- PS 303 Unit 5: Group processes paper
- PS 323 Unit 5: Gender and work paper
PS 210 Unit 5 questions, answered
Does the response have to be something a teacher could do?
Practical enough to picture, yes, but the paper is still an academic argument and not a lesson plan. Describe what the response involves and why the research supports it, rather than writing procedures for somebody else to follow. If your instructions ask for an implementation section, keep it short and keep every element attached to a finding you have already cited.
Can I use the scenario the classroom provides?
Use it if one is given, and follow its details exactly rather than adjusting them to suit an argument you had in mind. Where no scenario is supplied, build one and say in the opening that it was constructed for the assignment. Keep it simple: a grade, a subject, a described difficulty. Elaborate backstory adds words without adding anything the criterion measures.
A child I tutor has exactly this difficulty. May I write it up?
That belongs to the child and the family who engaged you, and a submitted paper is outside anything they agreed to. Tutoring notes, school reports and anything a parent told you in confidence stay where they are. What you have learned can guide which part of the literature you read closely. The case in the paper itself should be invented and stated to be invented.
Where can I find a free PS 210 Unit 5 sample paper?
The whole PS 210 Unit 5 school and learning application is free above, covering three findings, the argued response and margin notes. Given another classroom scenario? Pass along the assignment and a custom application is written free, typically within two days.
Does the PS 210 Unit 5 response have to be something a teacher could do?
Usually yes. The sample argues for process feedback because the teacher can change her wording within existing lessons at no cost, which a reader can check against the research.