Myths around growth mindset travel faster than papers. Each item pairs a folklore line with a tighter claim.
Worldwide notes name real systems — 영재교육, 예고, 部活, CTY, AIS, Iten — as places and policies, not racial essences.
Myths
- Growth mindset is proven large — Averages are small Sisk 2018 is the corrective. Some subgroups do better; posters do not.
- The 1998 praise effect always replicates — Li & Bates and others disagree Treat it as a famous design, not a law of nature.
- Mindset replaces teaching — It is a belief about difficulty Ericsson’s designed hour still has to happen.
- Gifted students should be told they are geniuses — Entity giftedness backfires A high ceiling plus incremental theory is the coherent pairing.
- If a child fails, they have a fixed mindset — Systems fail too Load, tracking and access are not personality defects.
- Binet thought IQ was a caste — He thought it was instructional The folklore of fixed IQ is later, and often American.
Worldwide
- United States — District mindset contracts — Post-2006 purchasing boom; Yeager-scale trials tried to put numbers under the posters.
- United Kingdom — Growth-mindset in Ofsted-era talk — Imported vocabulary; evidence fights followed the US literature.
- Australia — School-wide rollouts — Similar consulting wave; local evaluations vary.
- South Korea — Effort culture plus exam gates — A society that already praises hours can still run entity exam identities.
- Finland — Comprehensive years — Late tracking makes “you can still grow” structurally more plausible.
- Japan — 努力 talk and 部活 — Effort is already a moral word; that is not the same as Dweck’s incremental theory of intelligence.
Growth mindset: drop the folklore that ranks groups. Keep the systems that can be named and improved.