Abstract

Implicit theories concerning the malleability of human qualities are known to

have a powerful impact on motivation and learning, but their role in moral
education is an under-researched topic. In this qualitative case study, we
examined the impact of implicit theories on four Finnish teachers’ practices of
teaching morally and in teaching morality. The data include preliminary and
stimulated recall interviews (STR) as well as classroom observations. Our
results demonstrate the multiple ways in which teachers’ implicit beliefs are
communicated to students and influence teacher’s interpretations and
endeavors to educate the ethical capabilities of students. The study provides
evidence for the claim that implicit theories are an important construct which
has been missing from the moral education literature. Directions for future
research are suggested.
Keywords: Implicit theories, moral education, teachers, stimulated recall interviews (STR), Finland

Introduction

Teachers’ moral professionalism

Teaching is a moral profession (see for example,

Sanger, 2008Sanger, M.N. (2008). What we need to prepare teachers for the
moral nature of their work. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 40, 169–
185.10.1080/00220270701670856[Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science
®], [Google Scholar]; Sockett, 1993Sockett, H. (1993). The moral base for
teacher professionalism. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. [Google
Scholar]). It is a vocation that demands both a deep personal commitment and
clear, rational principles. In many European countries, such as Finland,
education is intended to support the development of the whole person rather
than merely the human cognitive domain. This type of education
acknowledges the importance of the social and affective domains in students’
development, including emotional and moral concerns. Students benefit both
socially and academically when supported in a caring classroom and school
environment (Noddings, 1992Noddings, N. (1992). The challenge to care in
schools: An alternative approach to education. New York, NY: Teachers’
College Press. [Google Scholar]; Tirri & Husu, 2006Tirri, K.,
& Husu, J. (2006). Pedagogical values behind teachers’ reflection of school
ethos. In M. Klein (Ed.), New teaching and teacher issues (pp. 163–182). New
York, NY: Nova Science publishers. [Google Scholar]).

Moral professionalism refers to the quality of educators’ professional practices

(Sockett, 1993Sockett, H. (1993). The moral base for teacher
professionalism. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. [Google Scholar]),
which are judged by professional standards and become evident in the
educators’ moral practices and roles in the everyday life of schools
(Hanhimäki, 2011Hanhimäki, E. (2011). Moral professionalism in interaction.
educators’ relational moral voices in urban schools (Diss. Münster). Waxmann
Publishing Co. [Google Scholar]). The moral dimension of teaching has been
discussed under various themes and typologies of skill sets for moral
professional teachers have been formulated. Typically, these include
orientations to moral sensitivity, moral judgment, moral motivation, moral
behavior, as well as teachers’ professional ethics and values (Bebeau, Rest, &
Narvaez, 1999Bebeau, M., Rest, J., & Narvaez, D.(1999). Beyond the
promise: A perspective on research in moral education. Educational
Researcher,28, 18–26.10.3102/0013189X028004018[Crossref], [Google
Scholar]; Narvaez, 2007Narvaez, D. (2007). How cognitive and
neurobiological sciences inform values education for creatures like us.
In D.N. Aspin & J.D. Chapman (Eds.), Values education and lifelong
learning (pp. 127–146). Netherlands: Springer.10.1007/978-1-4020-6184-
4[Crossref], [Google Scholar]; Rest, 1983Rest, J. (1983). Morality.
In P.Mussen (Ed.), Carmichael’s manual of child psychology (4th ed.). Volume
on Cognitive development (J. Flavell & E. Markman, Vol. Eds., pp. 556–
629). New York, NY: Wiley. [Google Scholar]; Tirri, Toom, &
Husu, 2013Tirri, K., Toom, A., & Husu, J. (2013). The moral matters of
teaching: A Finnish perspective. In C.J. Graig, P.C. Meijer,
& J. Broeckmans (Eds.), From teacher thinking to teachers and teaching: The
evolution of a research community (pp. 223–239). Bingley: Emerald
Publishing.10.1108/art[Crossref], [Google Scholar]). One way of making sense
of the different spheres of moral education, as suggested by Fenstermacher,
Osguthorpe, and Sanger (2009Fenstermacher, G.D., Osguthorpe, R.D.,
& Sanger, M.N. (2009). Teaching morally and teaching morality. Teacher
Education Quarterly, 36, 7–19. [Google Scholar]), is to distinguish
between teaching morally and teaching morality. Teaching morally refers to
the morality of teachers’ conduct; it pertains to modeling morally valuable
behavior for the students and resembles teachers’ moral ethos(see for
example, Gholami & Husu, 2010Gholami, K., & Husu, J. (2010). How do
teachers reason about their practice? Representing the epistemic nature of
teachers’ practical knowledge. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26, 1520–
1529.10.1016/j.tate.2010.06.001[Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google
Scholar]). Teaching morality refers to efforts to provide students with the
means for developing ethical capabilities. Despite the partial overlapping of
these categories, this distinction is an analytically useful device and is used in
this study. The basic assumption is that morally professional teachers need
competencies related both to their character and to their conduct if they are to
promote their students’ holistic development
(Tirri, 2011Tirri, K. (2011). Holistic school pedagogy and values: Finnish
teachers’ and students’ perspectives. International Journal of Educational
Research, 50, 159–165. [Google Scholar]; Tirri, Husu, &
Kansanen, 1999Tirri, K., Husu, J., & Kansanen, P.(1999). The epistemological
stance between the knower and the known. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 15, 911–922.10.1016/S0742-051X(99)00034-7[Crossref], [Web of
Science ®], [Google Scholar]).

There have also been debates over whether teachers’ moral professionalism
should be analyzed and developed with a focus on moral principles and their
application or whether a better approach would be to focus on practices of
‘good moral reasoning’ and pay attention to the intuitive processes of moral
judgment (Coombs, 1998Coombs, J.R. (1998). Educational ethics: Are we on
the right track?Educational Theory, 48, 555–569.10.1111/edth.1998.48.issue-
4[Crossref], [Google Scholar]). It is known that quick and intuitive processing
of social information in practical settings—such as the classroom—influences
the process of making moral judgments (Greene & Haidt, 2002Greene, J.,
& Haidt, J. (2002). How (and where) does moral judgment work? Trends in
Cognitive Sciences, 6, 517–523.10.1016/S1364-6613(02)02011-
9[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]). These
intuitions are often culturally bound (Vauclair, Wilson, &
Fischer, 2014Vauclair, C.-M., Wilson, M., & Fischer, R. (2014). Cultural
conceptions of morality: Examining laypeople’s associations of moral
character. Jounal of Moral Education,43, 54–74.[Taylor & Francis
Online], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]) and have roots in personal life
histories (Van Manen, 1994Van Manen, M. (1994). Pedagogy, virtue, and
narrative identity in teaching. Curriculum Inquiry, 24, 135–
170.10.1080/03626784.1994.11076157[Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of
Science ®], [Google Scholar]); therefore, they also reflect the individual’s
belief systems. We agree with the notions of Sanger and Osguthorpe
(2005Sanger, M., & Osguthorpe, R.(2005). Making sense of moral
education. Journal of Moral Education, 34, 57–
71.10.1080/03057240500049323[Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science
®], [Google Scholar], 2011Sanger, M.N., & Osguthorpe, R.D.(2011). Teacher
education, preservice teacher beliefs, and the moral work of
teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27, 569–
578.10.1016/j.tate.2010.10.011[Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google
Scholar]) on the centrality of teacher beliefs in the development of teachers’
moral professionalism—a view based on constructivist understanding of
teacher learning. Sanger and Osguthorpe (2011Sanger, M.N.,
& Osguthorpe, R.D.(2011). Teacher education, preservice teacher beliefs, and
the moral work of teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27, 569–
578.10.1016/j.tate.2010.10.011[Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google
Scholar]) call for empirical research to identify teacher beliefs that are
particularly relevant for the moral matters of teaching. In this article we present
empirical evidence for the implications of a particular set of core beliefs which
have proved to be highly influential on learning, motivation, and well-being, but
have previously been discussed very little in the field of moral education,
namely, implicit beliefs concerning the malleability of human qualities.

Teachers’ implicit theories

Dweck’s (2000Dweck, C.S. (2000). Self-theories: Their role in motivation,
personality and development. New York, NY: Psychology Press. [Google
Scholar], 2006Dweck, C.S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of
success. New York, NY: Random House Publishing Group. [Google Scholar])
idea of implicit theories (also called mindsets) is concerned with the implicit
beliefs individuals hold about basic human qualities. People with an
incremental theory (a growth mindset) believe that intelligence, personality
and abilities can be developed. People with an entity theory (a fixed mindset)
believe that these basic qualities are static and unalterable. The powerful
impact of implicit theories on learning and motivation are well-known (see for
example, Dweck, 2000Dweck, C.S. (2000). Self-theories: Their role in
motivation, personality and development. New York, NY: Psychology
Press. [Google Scholar]). Studies have shown that entity theorists emphasize
performance goals (‘looking smart,’ ‘proving their abilities’), whereas
incremental theorists emphasize learning goals (‘becoming smart,’ ‘improving
abilities’) (Dweck, 2000Dweck, C.S. (2000). Self-theories: Their role in
motivation, personality and development. New York, NY: Psychology
Press. [Google Scholar]; Dweck & Leggett, 1988Dweck, C.S.,
& Leggett, E.L. (1988). A social cognitive approach to motivation and
personality. Psychological Review, 95, 265–273.[Crossref], [Web of Science
®], [Google Scholar]). Furthermore, an entity theory is associated with having
a negative attitude to effort, as great effort and failure are interpreted as
indicating lack of ability, whereas an incremental theory is associated with an
understanding of failure as a learning opportunity. Accordingly, an entity
theory creates helpless behavior patterns, since it leads to avoidance of
challenges and low levels of persistence. Thus, students with an incremental
theory have higher achievements during challenging school transitions and
their completion rates in demanding school courses are greater (Blackwell,
Trzesniewski, & Dweck, 2007Blackwell, L.S., Trzesniewski, K.H.,
& Dweck, C.S. (2007). Implicit theories of intelligence predict achievement
across an adolescent transition: A longitudinal study and an intervention. Child
Development, 78, 246–263.10.1111/cdev.2007.78.issue-
1[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]; Yeager &
Dweck, 2012Yeager, D.S., & Dweck, C.S. (2012). Mindsets that promote
resilience: When students believe that personal characteristics can be
developed. Educational Psychologist,47, 302–
314.10.1080/00461520.2012.722805[Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of
Science ®], [Google Scholar]). Implicit theories are quite stable, yet they can
be altered by educational interventions (Blackwell et
al., 2007Blackwell, L.S., Trzesniewski, K.H., & Dweck, C.S. (2007). Implicit
theories of intelligence predict achievement across an adolescent transition: A
longitudinal study and an intervention. Child Development, 78, 246–
263.10.1111/cdev.2007.78.issue-1[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science
®], [Google Scholar]; Dweck, 2012Dweck, C.S. (2012). Mindsets and human
nature: Promoting change in the Middle East, the schoolyard, the racial divide,
and willpower. American Psychologist, 67, 614–
622.10.1037/a0029783[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google
Scholar]; Yeager & Dweck, 2012Yeager, D.S.,
& Dweck, C.S. (2012). Mindsets that promote resilience: When students
believe that personal characteristics can be developed. Educational
Psychologist,47, 302–314.10.1080/00461520.2012.722805[Taylor & Francis
Online], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]; Yeager, Trzesniewski, Tirri,
Nokelainen, &
Dweck, 2011Yeager, D., Trzesniewski, K.H., Tirri, K., Nokelainen, P.,
& Dweck, C.S.(2011). Adolescents’ implicit theories predict desire for
vengeance after remembered and hypothetical peer conflicts. Developmental
Psychology, 47, 1090–1107.10.1037/a0023769[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of
Science ®], [Google Scholar]).

Implicit theories, however, do not act alone; they are connected to a network
of other specifiable beliefs, which form structured meaning systems that direct
the way in which people understand themselves and others and give meaning
to their social experiences (Molden & Dweck, 2006Molden, D.C.,
& Dweck, C.S. (2006). Finding “meaning” in psychology. A lay theories
approach to self-regulation, social perception, and social
development. American Psychologist, 61, 192–203.10.1037/0003-
066X.61.3.192[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar];
Plaks, Levy, & Dweck, 2009Plaks, J.E., Levy, S.R., & Dweck, C.S.(2009). Lay
theories of personality: Cornerstones of meaning in social cognition. Social
and Personal Psychology Compass, 3, 1069–
1081.10.1111/spco.2009.3.issue-6[Crossref], [Google Scholar]). For example,
incremental theorists are found to interpret human behavior in terms of
context-sensitive psychological processes and situational factors, whereas
entity theorists have a tendency toward dispositional attribution and
emphasize deep-seated, cross-situational traits as the key causes of behavior
(Chiu, Hong, & Dweck, 1997Chiu, C., Hong, Y., & Dweck, C.S.(1997). Lay
dispositionism and implicit theories of personality. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 73, 19–30.10.1037/0022-
3514.73.1.19[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar];
Dweck, Chiu, & Hong 1995Dweck, C. S., Chiu, C., & Hong, Y.(1995). Implicit
theories and their role in judgements and reactions: A world from two
perspectives. Psychological Inquiry, 6, 267–285.[Taylor & Francis
Online], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]; Molden &
Dweck, 2006Molden, D.C., & Dweck, C.S. (2006). Finding “meaning” in
psychology. A lay theories approach to self-regulation, social perception, and
social development. American Psychologist, 61, 192–203.10.1037/0003-
066X.61.3.192[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]).
These tendencies also have implications for moral ethos and conduct. Since
entity theorists tend to believe in a fixed reality with a rigid moral order, they
regard fulfilling duties and striving for justice as fundamental to morality. By
contrast, incremental theorists, who tend to believe in a malleable social moral
reality tend to focus on improving the wrongdoer rather than carrying out
punishments in order to achieve justice (Chiu, Dweck, Tong, &
Fu, 1997Chiu, C., Dweck, C., Tong, Y., & Fu, J.(1997). Implicit theories and
conceptions of morality. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 73, 923–940.10.1037/0022-3514.73.5.923[Crossref], [Web of
Science ®], [Google Scholar]; Plaks et al., 2009Plaks, J.E., Levy, S.R.,
& Dweck, C.S.(2009). Lay theories of personality: Cornerstones of meaning in
social cognition. Social and Personal Psychology Compass, 3, 1069–
1081.10.1111/spco.2009.3.issue-6[Crossref], [Google Scholar]). Thus, the
assumption can be made that, if a teacher is inclined to entity theory, his/her
endeavors to teach morally are channeled by these tendencies, which can
also be described as features of duty-based morality (see
Dworkin, 1978Dworkin, R. (1978). Taking rights seriously. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar]) and by a professional moral
ethos primarily concerned with the concern for professional responsibilities
(see Gholami & Husu, 2010Gholami, K., & Husu, J. (2010). How do teachers
reason about their practice? Representing the epistemic nature of teachers’
practical knowledge. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26, 1520–
1529.10.1016/j.tate.2010.06.001[Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google
Scholar]). Likewise, the ethos of an incremental theorist teacher is presumably
inclined towards taking responsibility for students’ personal development,
meeting individual student needs and preserving individual rights—tendencies
related to a rights-based morality (Dworkin, 1978Dworkin, R. (1978). Taking
rights seriously. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar]).

Furthermore, since we also know that implicit theories influence how teachers
interpret social information in the classroom as well as the pedagogical
choices they make and that they continuously become communicated to the
students (Rattan, Good, and Dweck, 2012Rattan, A., Good, C.,
& Dweck, C.S.(2012). “It’s ok—Not everyone can be good at math”:
Instructors with entity theory comfort (and demotivate) students. Journal of
Experimental Psychology, 48, 731–737. [Google Scholar]; Rissanen,
Kuusisto, Hanhimäki, & Tirri, 2016Rissanen, I., Kuusisto, E., Hanhimäki, E.,
& Tirri, K. (2016). Teachers’ implicit meaning systems and their implications
for pedagogical thinking and practice: A case study from
Finland. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research.
doi:10.1080/00313831.2016.1258667[Taylor & Francis Online], [Google
Scholar]), we also assume that teachers’ implicit theories influence their
endeavors to teach morality. Subtle cues communicated to students can affect
the development of students’ implicit theories, which then affects the
development of their ethical capabilities. For example, different attribution
styles connected to implicit theories determine whether anger is directed
toward a person (entity theorists) or a situation (incremental theory); thus,
incremental theory fosters adaptive conflict resolution strategies, such as
forgiveness and voicing concerns and diminishes such things as desire for
revenge (Chiu et al., 1997Chiu, C., Dweck, C., Tong, Y.,
& Fu, J.(1997). Implicit theories and conceptions of morality. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 923–940.10.1037/0022-
3514.73.5.923[Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]; Kammrath &
Dweck, 2006Kammrath, L.K., & Dweck, C. (2006). Voicing conflict: Preferred
conflict strategies among incremental and entity theorists. Personality and
Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 1497–
1508.10.1177/0146167206291476[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science
®], [Google Scholar]; Loeb & Dweck, 1994Loeb, L.,
& Dweck, C. (1994). Beliefs about human nature as predictors of reactions to
victimization. Sixth Annual Convention of the American Psychological
Society, Washington, DC. [Google Scholar]). Implicit theories also affect goal
choice in morally challenging situations; entity theory increases the tendency
for ego-defensive action choices, such as lying, and incremental theory
promotes honesty (Mueller & Dweck, 1998Mueller, C.M.,
& Dweck, C.S. (1998). Praise for intelligence can undermine children’s
motivation and performance. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 75, 33–52.10.1037/0022-
3514.75.1.33[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]).
Furthermore, since incremental theories are known to prevent helplessness
responses and promote persistence after academic failures, there are good
reasons to suspect that the same applies to ethical failures and that it is easier
for children with incremental beliefs about personality to remain engaged with
the moral domain even after ethical setbacks
(Yeager, 2008Yeager, D. (2008). Adolescent mindsets and the education of
ethical sensitivity. In K. Tirri (Ed.), Educating moral sensibilities in urban
schools (pp. 63–78). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. [Google Scholar]). In
short, it is of utmost importance for teaching morality, whether or not the
teacher and the students all actually believe that ethical capabilities can be
changed.

The assumptions summarized below in Table 1 are provided on the basis of

previous literature and concern the implications of teachers’ implicit theories
for teaching morally and teaching morality. These assumptions will guide the
empirical observations in this qualitative case study.

Table 1. Implications of teachers’ implicit theories for teaching morally

and teaching morality: assumptions based on previous literature.
CSVDisplay Table

Finnish context

In Finland, the ethical role of teachers has changed from being religious and
moral examples to being principled professionals with academic university
education, beginning from the 1970s. Decentralization of curricula and the
principles of ethics for teachers published in 1998 by the Trade Union of
Education have further strengthened the autonomous professional role of
teachers in Finland. Finnish teachers typically view themselves as responsible
professionals whose task is to teach the basic knowledge of their subject, but
they also consider themselves responsible for the holistic education of their
students, including the social and affective domains
(Tirri, 2014Tirri, K. (2014). The last 40 years in Finnish teacher
education. Journal of Education for Teaching, 23, 1–
10.10.1080/02607476.2014.956545[Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science
®], [Google Scholar]). Previous research on the role of the professional
teacher indicates that teachers need more education in the moral domain
(Hanhimäki & Tirri, 2009Hanhimäki, E., & Tirri, K. (2009). Education for
ethically sensitive teaching in critical incidents at school. Journal of Education
for Teaching, 35, 107–121.10.1080/02607470902770880[Taylor & Francis
Online], [Google Scholar]).

The Finnish school system is comprised of pre-school education (up to the

age of six), basic education (nine years of comprehensive school, with an
optional tenth year), upper secondary-level education (upper secondary
school and vocational education) and higher education. At the lower level of
basic education (grades 1 to 6), teaching is generally given by a class teacher.
Teachers at the higher level (grades 7 to 10) and upper secondary schools
are specialized in their respective subjects. All teachers in basic education in
Finland have a master’s degree, which indicates the high level of academic
competence among Finnish teachers. Teachers are trusted and respected
(Sahlberg, 2011Sahlberg, P. (2011). Finnish lessons: What can the world
learn from educational change in Finland?. New York, NY: Teachers College
Press. [Google Scholar]). High-quality teacher education has been
acknowledged as one of the factors behind the excellent results Finnish
students have achieved since 2000 on the Programme for International
Student Assessment tests (PISA).

Another reason for Finland’s success in international comparisons is the

Finnish government’s principle of ‘equal opportunity and high-quality
education for all.’ Education is free at all levels and the government’s financial
support of public-sector educational institutions is strong: the vast majority of
schools are public schools. Since the 1970s, the main principle of Finnish
education has been to maintain equality, which is manifested in taking care of
the weakest students, such as children with learning difficulties (Tirri &
Kuusisto, 2013Tirri, K., & Kuusisto, E. (2013). How Finland serves gifted and
talented pupils. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 36, 84–
96.10.1177/0162353212468066[Crossref], [Google Scholar]; Uljens &
Nyman, 2013Uljens, M., & Nyman, C. (2013). Educational leadership in
Finland or building a nation with Bildung. In L. Moos (Ed.), Transnational
influence on values and practices in Nordic Educational Leadership: Is there a
Nordic Model? (pp. 31–48). Studies in Educational Leadership
19. Dordrecht: Springer. Doi: 10.1007/978-94-007-6226-
8_3[Crossref], [Google Scholar]). Another principle is that teaching methods
should be chosen in a way that considers students’ individual characteristics,
needs and interests. These principles reflect a promotional sphere of
education based on a malleable view of students’ qualities and individual
assessment. Nevertheless, the predominant sphere in the Finnish school
system is still restrictive, with intelligence and competencies perceived to be
fairly stable qualities that can be measured objectively by means of grades
and tests (Räty, Kasanen, Kiiskinen, Nykky, &
Atjonen, 2004Räty, H., Kasanen, K., Kiiskinen, J., Nykky, M.,
& Atjonen, P. (2004). Children’s’ notions of the malleability of their academic
ability in the mother tongue and Mathematics. Scandinavian Journal of
Educational Research, 48, 413–426.10.1080/0031383042000245807[Taylor &
Francis Online], [Google Scholar]). In day-to-day work, the promotional and
the restrictive seem to be regularly intertwined
(Kärkkäinen, 2011Kärkkäinen, R. (2011). Doing better? Children’s and their
parents’ and teachers’ perceptions of malleability of the child’s academic
competences. (Doctoral dissertation). University of Eastern Finland. Retrieved
fromhttps://epublications.uef.fi/pub/urn_isbn_978-952-61-0420-
1/urn_isbn_978-952-61-0420-1.pdf [Google Scholar]). Studies of Finnish
teachers’ implicit theories show that teachers mainly have an incremental
theory of giftedness (Laine, Kuusisto, & Tirri, 2016Laine, S., Kuusisto, E.,
& Tirri, K.(2016). Finnish teachers’ conceptions of giftedness. Journal for the
Education of the Gifted, 39, 151–
167.10.1177/0162353216640936[Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google
Scholar]). Furthermore, Finnish teachers seem to regard the academic
competence of poorly achieving students as malleable, but have more fixed
views of the stability of high-achievers’ competence
(Kärkkäinen, 2011Kärkkäinen, R. (2011). Doing better? Children’s and their
parents’ and teachers’ perceptions of malleability of the child’s academic
competences. (Doctoral dissertation). University of Eastern Finland. Retrieved
fromhttps://epublications.uef.fi/pub/urn_isbn_978-952-61-0420-
1/urn_isbn_978-952-61-0420-1.pdf [Google Scholar]; Kärkkäinen &
Räty, 2010Kärkkäinen, R., & Räty, H. (2010). Parents’ and teachers’ views of
the child’s academic potential. Educational Studies, 36, 229–
232.10.1080/03055690903162424[Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science
®], [Google Scholar]).
Method

Participants

The participants in this case study were four Finnish subject teachers whose
students came from diverse socio-economic, cultural and academic
backgrounds. An important criterion for the selection of these particular
teachers was the opportunity for the researchers to learn from them
(Stake, 2000Stake, R.E. (2000). Case studies.
In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative
research(pp. 134–164). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage
Publications. [Google Scholar]): the teachers were all experienced and eager
to share their ideas. They were also motivated in their work and had between
nine and 19 years of teaching experience.

Sally (each of the teachers was assigned a pseudonym) was originally a

language teacher, but had also qualified as a special education teacher. She
was teaching all subjects to a small group of low-achieving students in the
ninth grade. Her students had previously studied in normal classes, but in their
last year of comprehensive school, they were assigned to this smaller group.
Kate was a language teacher of English and French in an upper secondary
school. In the preliminary interview both Kate and Sally expressed strong
ideas about ‘educational optimism,’ which reflected their dominant incremental
theory. Jack was a subject teacher of mathematics and ICT, and we mainly
observed him teaching mathematics to ninth graders. In the preliminary
interview, Jack’s general tendency toward a dominant entity theory became
apparent. Patsy was teaching ‘Finnish as a second language’ to students in
grades 1–9. The classes she taught were small, usually having three to 15
students. Patsy’s mindset showed considerable situational variation in the
preliminary interview and during the observations.

Measures and procedure

These four teachers were chosen from a survey measuring Finnish teachers’
(N = 463) implicit theories using Carol Dweck’s mindset inventory
(Dweck, 2000Dweck, C.S. (2000). Self-theories: Their role in motivation,
personality and development. New York, NY: Psychology Press. [Google
Scholar], 2006Dweck, C.S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of
success. New York, NY: Random House Publishing Group. [Google Scholar];
Laine et al., 2016Laine, S., Kuusisto, E., & Tirri, K.(2016). Finnish teachers’
conceptions of giftedness. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 39, 151–
167.10.1177/0162353216640936[Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google
Scholar]). The sample item for the scale was ‘Your giftedness is something
very basic about you that you can’t change very much.’ The scale was
dichotomous; after reversing two scales, means close to 0 indicated an entity
view of giftedness, while 1 indicated an incremental view. The means of the
teachers were: Sally (M = 1), Kate (M = .75), Jack (M = .25) and Patsy
(M = .25).

The data include preliminary interviews with the teachers in which they were
asked questions related to their backgrounds, current job and professional
aims. We observed each teacher during approximately 15 lessons, of which
we videotaped 10 with Sally, 10 with Kate, six with Jack and nine with Patsy.
We endeavored to get as much from each teacher as was possible during the
research period, but had to respect individual teachers’ schedules and wishes:
this is why the number of videotapes and interviews conducted among the
teachers varies. There were also stimulated recall interviews (STR) following
the days on which we videotaped the lessons (five STR interviews with Sally
and three with each of the other teachers). The observations were also
verbally recorded by means of intensive field notes. STRs are directed to the
past: when interviewees view past actions with the video recordings used to
stimulate their memory, they are able to remember their past thoughts with
greater validity (Tochon, 2009Tochon, F.V. (2009). From video cases to video
pedagogy: A framework for video feedback and reflection in pedagogical
research praxis. In R. Goldman, R. Pea, B.Barron, & S.J. Derry (Eds.), Video
research in the learning sciences (pp. 53–56). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis
Group. [Google Scholar]). After every videotaped lesson, we watched the tape
and, with the help of written notes, identified critical incidents. According to
Flanagan (1953Flanagan, J. (1953). The critical incident
method. Pittsburgh, PA: American Institute for Research and University of
Pittsburgh. [Google Scholar]), this technique is essential when the aim is to
collect certain important facts related to well-defined situations: it has already
proved to be a valuable tool in studies analyzing ethical tensions in education
(Shapira-Lishchinsky, 2011Shapira-Lishchinsky, O. (2011). Teachers’ critical
incidents: Ethical dilemmas in teaching practice. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 27, 648–656.10.1016/j.tate.2010.11.003[Crossref], [Web of
Science ®], [Google Scholar]). In this study, the critical incidents were
moments in which teachers appeared to be interpreting their students’
behavior, learning, or achievement, and acting according to these
interpretations. In the STR interview, we watched the critical incidents with the
teachers (28 critical incidents with Sally, 52 with Kate, 22 with Jack and 21
with Patsy) and asked them about their thoughts and feelings during these
moments and the reasons for their actions. In addition, the teachers were
given an opportunity to reflect freely on the observed lessons. We identified a
greater number of critical incidents in the lessons of incremental theorist
teachers; this indicates they interpreted student behavior and reacted to it in a
more explicit manner.

The preliminary interviews and STRs were transcribed. First, we inductively

coded and categorized teachers’ understandings of the teaching-studying-
learning processes by using the preliminary interviews as primary data. After
that, a more deductive analysis process was conducted, through which we
identified the implications of teachers’ implicit theories for their pedagogical
thinking and practice. Our purpose was not only to determine whether the
tendencies described in the previous literature would appear in our data, but
also to examine the varieties and situational differences in the teachers’
meaning making and thinking. The reliability of the analysis is enhanced by
the fact that the data were reviewed and interpreted by multiple researchers,
as well as by the use of multiple data sources.

Research design
This study was conducted at two Finnish comprehensive schools and one
upper secondary school during the spring of 2014. The study is part of a
mixed-methods project investigating teachers’ implicit beliefs concerning the
malleability of academic abilities. In the qualitative phase of the project, the
implications of teacher’s implicit theories for moral education became
apparent, and a sub-study focusing on them was planned. In the present sub-
study, our research questions were: What are the implications of teachers’
implicit theories for moral education? In particular, what are the implications
for teaching morally and teaching morality?

Results

Implications of teachers’ implicit theories for teaching morally

In some respects, each of the teachers in our study exemplified the holistic
orientation typical of Finnish teachers (Tirri, 2014Tirri, K. (2014). The last
40 years in Finnish teacher education. Journal of Education for
Teaching, 23, 1–10.10.1080/02607476.2014.956545[Taylor & Francis
Online], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]) in that they believed that,
besides teaching the subject matter, it is also the teacher’s job to nurture the
students and help them face the future. However, their different implicit
theories seemed to be reflected in their professional moral ethos. Sally and
Kate, the teachers who exhibited a dominant incremental theory, took a great
deal of responsibility for their students’ personal development. In general, their
incremental interpretation of social-moral reality as dynamic and malleable
allowed for an orientation toward supporting changes (see Chiu, Dweck, Tong,
& Fu, 1997Chiu, C., Dweck, C., Tong, Y., & Fu, J.(1997). Implicit theories and
conceptions of morality. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 73, 923–940.10.1037/0022-3514.73.5.923[Crossref], [Web of
Science ®], [Google Scholar]). Their strong beliefs in their own ability to
promote the moral progress of their students and even the whole of society
seemed to be the most important motivators for their work:

I think what actually motivates me the most in teaching languages is that, in

the end, the aim of learning languages is that there would be no wars, no
hatred, because language helps you to come closer to other human beings
who do not share your culture. (Kate, preliminary interview)
Both teachers believed that, when students come from difficult backgrounds,
the school and the teacher should take even more responsibility for them.
Their moral ethos seemed to flow from the ideals of treating individual
students in a way that respects their rights and promotes their moral growth,
reflecting moral conceptions connected to rights-based morality (Chiu et
al., 1997Chiu, C., Dweck, C., Tong, Y., & Fu, J.(1997). Implicit theories and
conceptions of morality. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 73, 923–940.10.1037/0022-3514.73.5.923[Crossref], [Web of
Science ®], [Google Scholar]). This ethos is enabled by beliefs in the
significance of individual and group-psychological processes as tenets of
learning and development, typical of incremental theorists (see for example,
Molden, Plaks, & Dweck, 2006Molden, D.C., Plaks, J.E.,
& Dweck, C.S. (2006). “Meaningful” social inferences: Effects of implicit
theories on inferential processes. Journal of Experimental Social
Psychology, 42, 738–752.10.1016/j.jesp.2005.11.005[Crossref], [Web of
Science ®], [Google Scholar]). In the following quote, Sally reflects on a
situation where a student has refused to participate in group work during one
lesson:
I was thinking like … the way you are allowed to be a part of a group. That do
you always have to be that social and in a good mood in order to feel that you
are a part of a group? As a teacher, too often I think that everybody has to
participate actively. … If somebody is in a bad mood and not feeling social
enough to have the energy to do those things, I guess they should have the
right to be a part of that group even while not participating that much. Of
course, it is problematic if a student refuses to do what he is supposed to do,
but maybe as a teacher I should figure out another way for him to participate.
… If you think how it would feel if you were in a really bad mood and you
should play and sing and things like that, you would really not want to do that.
(Sally, STR interview, critical incident 26)
Whereas in the STR interviews Sally and Kate evaluated their practices of
teaching morally in terms of being able to steer these processes and meet the
students’ individual needs in the classroom, Jack concentrated on analyzing
his practices of teaching morally in terms of fulfilling his duties—following the
curriculum, implementing the rules of the school in his classroom, achieving
justice through punishments and assessing the students correctly. For
example, when Jack was asked ‘What kind of teacher are you?’ in the
preliminary interview, he answered by explaining how he never let the
students pass the courses ‘through mercy’—for him, strictness of assessment
was among the most important professional moral virtues.

While the actions and reflections of Sally, Kate and Jack in many ways proved
the relevance of the assumptions concerning the implications of implicit
theories for teachers’ moral ethos (Table1), Patsy seemed to have more a
unstable and ambiguous moral ethos. She had an entity view of giftedness,
but more belief in the malleability of personality and ethical capabilities. Patsy
was very much involved with her students and sometimes referred to herself
as a ‘social worker,’ yet her conscience constantly bothered her because she
believed she was not fulfilling her professional responsibilities, for instance,
not following the curriculum strictly or giving individual students more freedom
than allowed according to the school rules. Her own understanding of the
grounds for teaching morally seemed to be in conflict with the school ethos
wherein morality was apparently understood in terms of following norms and
regulations. The school culture repressed Patsy’s emerging incremental ideals
on morality and made her constantly feel unsure about her choices. The
research process and deep reflections during the STR interviews seemed to
make her conscious of the conflicts she experienced and actually led her to
seek a job at another school.

Implications of teachers’ implicit theories for teaching morality

The teachers’ implicit theories, or in other words their beliefs in the possibility
of moral growth in their students, were communicated to the students in many
ways. When their students faced ethical failures—for example, when they
misbehaved or came to the lessons late, Kate and Sally often made them find
the reasons for their failures outside their personal qualities, thereby
illustrating an incremental view about morality. Furthermore, the most obvious
feature that Kate and Sally shared was persistence. In their view,
implementing punishments and striving for justice were not the only parts of
their job as moral educators: they tirelessly demanded change in their
students’ behavior and, by communicating their high expectations for the
development of ethical capabilities, they left no room for helpless behavior
patterns. In the classroom, Kate could be somewhat harsher than Sally, and
was also quite outspoken about her dissatisfaction with her students’ actions.
However, she thought the students’ actions could be strictly controlled and
judged, without actually judging the students themselves:

Kate talks to a student who has come in late to the lesson for the second time
in a row:

So is there a problem with your alarm clock? This is the second time you show
up late. If the reason is, I’m sorry but I assume the reason is that you’re on a
computer too late in the evening, so cut it out. I mean come on, it is the middle
of the day already. I woke up at six today and so have many others here, so I
will send a message to your parents about this; they have to know about this.
(Kate, critical incident 41)
In the STR interview Kate reflected on the situation:
Well, that was a bit mean of me, but I think it’s not that bad that I say these
things, because it’s not the result of your appearance, but what you do or don’t
do. That’s what I criticize. I don’t even know the families of these students,
like, your brother was terrible and I’ve taught your mother and she was terrible
too, always late. … I know people have heard these things, that you will never
achieve anything because your dad didn’t either. … I would never fall for that
kind of thinking. (Kate, STR interview)
Furthermore, the teachers’ incremental beliefs were communicated and
actualized in their rather determined ways of trusting the students. Trust and
forgiveness were central conflict resolution strategies, particularly for Sally.
According to Yeager (2008Yeager, D. (2008). Adolescent mindsets and the
education of ethical sensitivity. In K. Tirri (Ed.), Educating moral sensibilities in
urban schools (pp. 63–78). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. [Google Scholar], p.
74), the incremental theory allows for an attributional style that construes the
causes of bullying as an interaction between personal qualities and the
situation. As soon as one can attribute causes to the situation, new worlds of
conflict resolution strategies become opened. Changing one’s own actions,
changing social systems, empathizing with the bully’s construal of the situation
and even forgiveness become plausible ways to fix the problem.

These incremental strategies were clearly demonstrated in Sally’s practices,

as shown in the following example related to resolving a case of bullying:

Sally talks about a girl who has been bullied in the school for years. The girl
started in Sally’s class together with other students who had been members of
the group that had bullied her. Sally talks about how she dealt with this
situation during a field trip.
Sally:

At the beginning of the fall we had a field trip, which made me very nervous,
because I did not know these students very well at the time. This girl stayed
close to me all the time, and I encouraged her to join the others, but she did
not have the courage. She started to cry and said that she was afraid they
would reject her. So, I asked what she would think if I went over and explained
this to the other students; she gave me her permission, and I told everyone
that she had been bullied harshly. Now she’s afraid to be around you, that you
will say something mean to her. They talked for a while about who else had
been bullied and what it feels like, and then they decided to go and ask the girl
to come with them, and told her they did not intend to bully her. The girls
asked her to play football with them, and since then it has been okay; the
group made her feel like she fits in.

Researcher:

It’s quite amazing that you have enough trust in these students that you
weren’t afraid they’d refuse to collaborate with you on this.

Sally:

Yes, I can trust them. … But I needed to be sure. I could not know that
beforehand, but when I saw their reaction I was so relieved; I realized that this
is the place where this girl’s situation will get better. … I know in this group
there are students who have been involved in bullying her, but since they
began in this new class and the atmosphere that we have, it [the bullying]
ended instantly. There have not even been mean looks or anything like that. I
would have seen them if there were—not a single one. (Sally, STR interview,
critical incident 11)
Instead of labeling people as bullies or punishing them, Sally resolved the
situation based on closely monitoring the students, creating a safe
atmosphere for everyone, trusting the students and believing in their ability to
change—an approach that proved to be effective. And her situational
attribution was also communicated to the students. Showing trust, avoiding
judging the students and avoiding labeling were also central ideals for Kate:
I need to try to understand and to be flexible. My principle is that I don’t always
expect the worst: if they tell me something, I try to believe it if there is no
evidence pointing in another direction. I know some colleagues always
assume that they [the students] are lying, but somehow I would like to see the
good in the students, because it easily becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. But
at the same time I try to stay alert if there is something that seems suspicious.
(Kate, preliminary interview)
Thus, Kate’s and Sally’s practices were likely to support students’ situational
attributions, belief in the possibility of moral growth and adaptive courses of
action (see Table1). However, Jack’s low belief in students being able to
develop ethical capabilities was communicated to them in his low expectations
and his use of labeling language, e.g., referring to some students in the
classroom as “late arrivers.” His tendency of giving up on the students also
induced helpless responses:
So they are like … as long as they sometimes come to the lessons and do
something… it’s typical for them to arrive twenty minutes late, but I have only
given them their tasks then. And it’s like. … I can’t do anything about it; it’s
their own choice. (Jack, STR interview, critical incident 13)
Since entity theorists attribute moral violations to unchanging character traits,
they tend to consider judgment and punishment necessary to control behavior
(Chiu et al., 1997Chiu, C., Dweck, C., Tong, Y., & Fu, J.(1997). Implicit
theories and conceptions of morality. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 73, 923–940.10.1037/0022-3514.73.5.923[Crossref], [Web of
Science ®], [Google Scholar]). Implementing consistent consequences for
moral violations was important for Jack; however, Jack had labeled some
students ‘lost causes,’ and had almost completely given up trying to control
them. Even though Jack cared about his students and their personal
development, he considered it very unlikely that he as a teacher could
influence students’ moral behavior:
Let’s say … it is very difficult to aim at the personal development of the
students. Mostly, we try to keep them under some kind of control. At this
phase, in upper comprehensive school, it is not possible to teach manners
that much anymore; I cannot regard that as my responsibility anymore,
whether they wear hats in the classroom, spit on the streets, wait on traffic
lights, stay quiet in the classroom … even though in my lessons, of course, I
take care of that. But it’s like … their behavior, they have already learned it,
and you cannot change it anymore. (Jack, preliminary interview)
Jack’s understanding of students’ moral development here mostly relates to
the students’ ability to follow the rules and norms.

Patsy, on the other hand, did not give her students negative labels, but rather
tried to encourage them by praising their good traits and communicating
positive judgments of their personal qualities. She seemed to have decided to
see only the good in her students:

My students are a kind of marginal group: I only teach students with an

immigrant background … so I have beautiful, nice and friendly, and somehow
… endearing students. I mean, I have the nicest students in the school.
(Patsy, preliminary interview)
It is evident that negative or labeling feedback of personal qualities might
influence students’ motivation for personal growth, but studies have also
demonstrated how praising the qualities of students, which entity theory
teachers have a greater tendency to do (Jonsson, Beach, Korp, &
Erlandson, 2012Jonsson, A.-C., Beach, D., Korp, H.,
& Erlandson, P. (2012). Teachers’ implicit theories of intelligence: Influences
from different disciplines and scientific theories. European Journal of Teacher
Education, 35, 387–400.[Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science
®], [Google Scholar]), also has negative effects on student perseverance in
the face of challenges and setbacks (Mueller & Dweck, 1998Mueller, C.M.,
& Dweck, C.S. (1998). Praise for intelligence can undermine children’s
motivation and performance. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 75, 33–52.10.1037/0022-
3514.75.1.33[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]).The
same applies to teacher’s practices of comforting rather than encouraging the
students (Rattan et al., 2012Rattan, A., Good, C., & Dweck, C.S.(2012). “It’s
ok—Not everyone can be good at math”: Instructors with entity theory comfort
(and demotivate) students. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 48, 731–
737. [Google Scholar]). Thus, Patsy’s practices of praising and comforting
probably communicated her entity beliefs to the students. Her strong
emotional involvement and sensitivity combined with her entity beliefs which
occasionally took over also caused frustration and experiences of
helplessness, as demonstrated by the following quotation:

Patsy reflects on her discussion with a student, an immigrant boy who Patsy
has encouraged by saying that she could see him as a film director one day:

Patsy:

He is such an artistically talented boy, he shapes all these amazing things and
has such good spatial perception; he has made movies with his friend here …

Researcher:

So why do you think you wanted to tell the boy about this movie?
Patsy:

[starts crying] I’m sorry … oh, this is embarrassing … but he is such a smart
and talented boy.

Researcher:

And you wanted to encourage him by telling about that director? [whose name
resembles the boy’s name]

Patsy:

Yes … yes … because I think this boy could become anything. He is so

talented. He has an amazing imagination …

Researcher:

So what do you think, what should you do with this boy in school? What can
you do as a teacher?

Patsy:

I think we should … keep him under control. … if we could have expectations

but not expect too much … and if we could support him … and believe in him.
(Patsy, STR interview, critical incident 8)

The boy occasionally misbehaved at school, and Patsy was afraid that he
would lose his opportunities as a result; however, her way of dealing with the
situation by trying to encourage the student by praising his personal qualities
rather than demanding an improvement in his behavior reflects her entity
beliefs and could have unintended negative consequences for the boy’s
motivation for moral growth.
Discussion

This study provided further evidence for Yeager’s

(2008Yeager, D. (2008). Adolescent mindsets and the education of ethical
sensitivity. In K. Tirri (Ed.), Educating moral sensibilities in urban
schools (pp. 63–78). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. [Google Scholar]) claim
that an important construct has been missing from the list of moral concepts
relevant to moral education: implicit theories. We investigated the implications
of teachers’ implicit theories for practices of teaching morality and teaching
morally. On the basis of previous literature, we assumed that teachers inclined
to incremental theory could also be inclined to a moral ethos centered around
taking responsibility for students’ personal development, meeting their
individual needs and preserving individual rights. In our data we did find strong
evidence for these tendencies. Also, our data showed that the ways in which
entity theory can be related to professional moral ethos centered around the
fulfillment of responsibilities and striving for justice. These moral ethoses,
which we conceptualized as teachers’ different interpretations of
what teaching morally should indicate, are actualized in the classroom in
multiple ways and provide a model for students for what comprises morality
and moral growth.

In addition to this modeling function, the moral ethos of teachers is linked to

different practices of teaching morality or, in other words, teachers’ endeavors
to support the development of students’ ethical capabilities. Teachers’ implicit
theories are communicated to the students, for instance, through their
reactions to the students’ ethical failures, which is likely to influence the
implicit beliefs of the students and shape their motivation for moral growth
(Dweck, 2000Dweck, C.S. (2000). Self-theories: Their role in motivation,
personality and development. New York, NY: Psychology Press. [Google
Scholar]). The question of whether a teacher seeks an explanation for a
student’s behavior in fixed qualities or puts emphasis on contextual factors
appears to have a significant impact on the teacher’s persistence in steering
the development of students’ ethical growth, with an understandable tendency
of entity theory teachers to give up on the students. We found our teachers
with incremental theory leanings to be more inclined to trust the students, not
predict their future behavior on the basis of their previous actions, and help
them find explanations other than personal qualities for their failures.

However, while one of our entity theory teachers was oriented toward
controlling student behavior through punishment and strict assessment, and
he also commonly labeled the students, there was much more situational
variation in the practices of the other teacher, who held entity beliefs.
Moreover, her case allowed us to conclude that, while implicit theories and the
moral ethos related to them are often analyzed and discussed as individually-
held orientations, they can also be implemented in the wider community
culture. Furthermore, when an individual teacher’s implicit beliefs and
understanding of morality contradict what is cultivated in the school culture, a
teacher can become exhausted, frustrated and confused in her job.

Teachers’ conduct should be governed by principles of professional ethics.

However, the way ethical principles are translated into lived pedagogical
practice is a matter of a teacher’s intuitive decision-making influenced by
explicit and implicit beliefs, as well as the teacher’s concern for
consequences. However, the moral consequences of their actions are often
unknown to the teachers themselves (Tirri et al., 2013Tirri, K., Toom, A.,
& Husu, J. (2013). The moral matters of teaching: A Finnish perspective.
In C.J. Graig, P.C. Meijer, & J. Broeckmans (Eds.), From teacher thinking to
teachers and teaching: The evolution of a research community (pp. 223–
239). Bingley: Emerald Publishing.10.1108/art[Crossref], [Google Scholar]).
On the basis of previous literature as well as the results of this study, we claim
that making teachers aware of their implicit theories, how they communicate
these to students, and the possible consequences for students’ beliefs about
and motivation for moral growth is an important part of developing teachers’
moral professionalism. Entity beliefs concerning personality can be linked, for
example, to depression and problems in relationships (Yeager et
al., 2011Yeager, D., Trzesniewski, K.H., Tirri, K., Nokelainen, P.,
& Dweck, C.S.(2011). Adolescents’ implicit theories predict desire for
vengeance after remembered and hypothetical peer conflicts. Developmental
Psychology, 47, 1090–1107.10.1037/a0023769[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of
Science ®], [Google Scholar]), which further highlights the centrality of implicit
theories for the moral consequences of teachers’ practices. Perseverance is
based on an incremental view of intelligence and is known to boost academic
learning (e.g., Blackwell et al., 2007Blackwell, L.S., Trzesniewski, K.H.,
& Dweck, C.S. (2007). Implicit theories of intelligence predict achievement
across an adolescent transition: A longitudinal study and an intervention. Child
Development, 78, 246–263.10.1111/cdev.2007.78.issue-
1[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]). However,
similar perseverance is needed when facing difficulties in other fields of
personal development. Therefore, if the purpose of a school is to support the
holistic development of its students, then persistence of both students and
teachers in developing the students’ personal and moral qualities should be
supported.

In teacher education, this can be done, for example, by teaching about implicit
theories and familiarizing the students with the research literature
demonstrating the counter-intuitive effects of such things as praising personal
qualities and giving comforting feedback (Mueller &
Dweck, 1998Mueller, C.M., & Dweck, C.S. (1998). Praise for intelligence can
undermine children’s motivation and performance. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 75, 33–52.10.1037/0022-
3514.75.1.33[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar];
Rattan et al., 2012Rattan, A., Good, C., & Dweck, C.S.(2012). “It’s ok—Not
everyone can be good at math”: Instructors with entity theory comfort (and
demotivate) students. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 48, 731–
737. [Google Scholar]). Making teacher beliefs and their implications explicit
entails giving teachers more control over what they are doing
(Sanger, 2008Sanger, M.N. (2008). What we need to prepare teachers for the
moral nature of their work. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 40, 169–
185.10.1080/00220270701670856[Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science
®], [Google Scholar] in Tirri et al., 2013Tirri, K., Toom, A.,
& Husu, J. (2013). The moral matters of teaching: A Finnish perspective.
In C.J. Graig, P.C. Meijer, & J. Broeckmans (Eds.), From teacher thinking to
teachers and teaching: The evolution of a research community (pp. 223–
239). Bingley: Emerald Publishing.10.1108/art[Crossref], [Google Scholar]).
However, we should aim further than just raising awareness. It is known that
entity beliefs are detrimental, and, according to current knowledge about the
malleability of the brain, such beliefs are not true; this is why they should be
changed. Interventions have successfully been used to promote incremental
beliefs in students. The main feature of such interventions has been to teach
students about the potential of the brain to change and reorganize when
people learn and practice new ways of thinking (Blackwell et
al., 2007Blackwell, L.S., Trzesniewski, K.H., & Dweck, C.S. (2007). Implicit
theories of intelligence predict achievement across an adolescent transition: A
longitudinal study and an intervention. Child Development, 78, 246–
263.10.1111/cdev.2007.78.issue-1[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science
®], [Google Scholar]; Dweck, 2012Dweck, C.S. (2012). Mindsets and human
nature: Promoting change in the Middle East, the schoolyard, the racial divide,
and willpower. American Psychologist, 67, 614–
622.10.1037/a0029783[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google
Scholar]; Yeager & Dweck, 2012Yeager, D.S.,
& Dweck, C.S. (2012). Mindsets that promote resilience: When students
believe that personal characteristics can be developed. Educational
Psychologist,47, 302–314.10.1080/00461520.2012.722805[Taylor & Francis
Online], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]; Yeager et
al., 2011Yeager, D., Trzesniewski, K.H., Tirri, K., Nokelainen, P.,
& Dweck, C.S.(2011). Adolescents’ implicit theories predict desire for
vengeance after remembered and hypothetical peer conflicts. Developmental
Psychology, 47, 1090–1107.10.1037/a0023769[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of
Science ®], [Google Scholar]). There are good reasons to consider developing
interventions with focuses other than academic learning and to teach about
the malleability of the personality and moral behavior. The effects of brief
interventions in students’ academic achievement have proven to be powerful
and relatively long lasting (Paunesku, 2013Paunesku, D. (2013). Scaled-up
social psychology: Intervening wisely and broadly in education (Doctoral
Dissertation). Stanford University. Retrieved
fromhttps://web.stanford.edu/~paunesku/paunesku_2013.pdf [Google
Scholar]). The next step is to develop interventions for teachers.

The evidence presented in this study of the relevance of the assumptions

concerning the implications of teachers’ implicit theories is only an initial step,
but it is convincing enough to justify the claim that this topic merits more
research. More wide-range and systematic research is needed on: (1) how
teachers’ implicit beliefs concerning ethical capabilities affect their
communication and practices in the classroom; and (2) what impact these
interaction and action patterns have on students’ motivation for moral growth.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes on contributors
 Inkeri Rissanen is a University Lecturer at the Faculty of Education in the
University of Tampere, with a specialization on multicultural education. Her
academic work is focused around religious education and Islamic religious
education, questions of Muslim inclusion in education, teacher’s intercultural
competences and sensitivities and teacher’s implicit meaning systems. She
has published on these topics in international educational journals and books.

Elina Kuusisto works as a Post-Doctoral Researcher and is a Docent of

Education at the Faculty of Educational Sciences, the University of Helsinki,
Finland. Her academic writings deal with moral education, religious education
and teacher education, with special interest in the education of moral
sensitivity, purpose in life and growth mindset.

Eija Hanhimäki works as a project planner at the Deparment of Teacher

Education in the University of Jyväskylä, Finland. Her academic writings and
research interests deal with moral interaction and ethics in teaching and
counselling.

Kirsi Tirri is a Professor of Education and Research Director at the Helsinki

Collegium of Advanced Studies, University of Helsinki. She is also a President
of the Finnish Academy of Science and Letters and a visiting Professor at St.
John’s University, New York, USA. She has published widely in international
educational journals and books on teacher education, moral education and
gifted education. She also serves on the Editorial Boards of 13 educational
journals. You can read more of her work at: http://www.helsinki.fi/~ktirri

References
1. Bebeau, M., Rest, J., & Narvaez, D. (1999). Beyond the promise: A perspective on
research in moral education. Educational Researcher, 28, 18–
26.10.3102/0013189X028004018

[Crossref]

[Google Scholar]

2. Blackwell, L.S., Trzesniewski, K.H., & Dweck, C.S. (2007). Implicit theories of
intelligence predict achievement across an adolescent transition: A longitudinal study
and an intervention. Child Development, 78, 246–263.10.1111/cdev.2007.78.issue-1

[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®]

,
 [Google Scholar]

3. Chiu, C., Dweck, C., Tong, Y., & Fu, J. (1997). Implicit theories and conceptions of
morality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 923–940.10.1037/0022-
3514.73.5.923

[Crossref], [Web of Science ®]

[Google Scholar]

4. Chiu, C., Hong, Y., & Dweck, C.S. (1997). Lay dispositionism and implicit theories of
personality.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 19–30.10.1037/0022-
3514.73.1.19

[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®]

[Google Scholar]

5. Coombs, J.R. (1998). Educational ethics: Are we on the right track? Educational
Theory, 48, 555–569.10.1111/edth.1998.48.issue-4

[Crossref]

[Google Scholar]

6. Dweck, C.S. (2000). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality and

development. New York,NY: Psychology Press.

[Google Scholar]

7. Dweck, C.S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. New

York, NY: Random House Publishing Group.

[Google Scholar]

8. Dweck, C.S. (2012). Mindsets and human nature: Promoting change in the Middle
East, the schoolyard, the racial divide, and willpower. American
Psychologist, 67, 614–622.10.1037/a0029783

[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®]

 ,

[Google Scholar]

9. Dweck, C. S., Chiu, C., & Hong, Y. (1995). Implicit theories and their role in
judgements and reactions: A world from two perspectives. Psychological
Inquiry, 6, 267–285.

[Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®]

[Google Scholar]

10. Dweck, C.S., & Leggett, E.L. (1988). A social cognitive approach to motivation and
personality.Psychological Review, 95, 265–273.

[Crossref], [Web of Science ®]

[Google Scholar]

11. Dworkin, R. (1978). Taking rights seriously. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.

[Google Scholar]

12. Fenstermacher, G.D., Osguthorpe, R.D., & Sanger, M.N. (2009). Teaching morally
and teaching morality. Teacher Education Quarterly, 36, 7–19.

[Google Scholar]

13. Flanagan, J. (1953). The critical incident method. Pittsburgh, PA: American Institute
for Research and University of Pittsburgh.

[Google Scholar]

14. Gholami, K., & Husu, J. (2010). How do teachers reason about their practice?
Representing the epistemic nature of teachers’ practical knowledge. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 26, 1520–1529.10.1016/j.tate.2010.06.001

[Crossref], [Web of Science ®]

 ,

[Google Scholar]

15. Greene, J., & Haidt, J. (2002). How (and where) does moral judgment work? Trends
in Cognitive Sciences, 6, 517–523.10.1016/S1364-6613(02)02011-9

[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®]

[Google Scholar]

16. Hanhimäki, E. (2011). Moral professionalism in interaction. educators’ relational

moral voices in urban schools (Diss. Münster). Waxmann Publishing Co.

[Google Scholar]

17. Hanhimäki, E., & Tirri, K. (2009). Education for ethically sensitive teaching in critical
incidents at school. Journal of Education for Teaching, 35, 107–
121.10.1080/02607470902770880

[Taylor & Francis Online]

[Google Scholar]

18. Jonsson, A.-C., Beach, D., Korp, H., & Erlandson, P. (2012). Teachers’ implicit
theories of intelligence: Influences from different disciplines and scientific
theories. European Journal of Teacher Education, 35, 387–400.

[Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®]

[Google Scholar]

19. Kammrath, L.K., & Dweck, C. (2006). Voicing conflict: Preferred conflict strategies
among incremental and entity theorists. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 32, 1497–1508.10.1177/0146167206291476

[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®]

[Google Scholar]
20. Kärkkäinen, R. (2011). Doing better? Children’s and their parents’ and teachers’
perceptions of malleability of the child’s academic competences. (Doctoral
dissertation). University of Eastern Finland. Retrieved
from https://epublications.uef.fi/pub/urn_isbn_978-952-61-0420-1/urn_isbn_978-952-
61-0420-1.pdf

[Google Scholar]

21. Kärkkäinen, R., & Räty, H. (2010). Parents’ and teachers’ views of the child’s
academic potential.Educational Studies, 36, 229–232.10.1080/03055690903162424

[Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®]

[Google Scholar]

22. Laine, S., Kuusisto, E., & Tirri, K. (2016). Finnish teachers’ conceptions of
giftedness. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 39, 151–
167.10.1177/0162353216640936

[Crossref], [Web of Science ®]

[Google Scholar]

23. Loeb, L., & Dweck, C. (1994). Beliefs about human nature as predictors of reactions
to victimization.Sixth Annual Convention of the American Psychological
Society, Washington, DC.

[Google Scholar]

24. Molden, D.C., & Dweck, C.S. (2006). Finding “meaning” in psychology. A lay theories
approach to self-regulation, social perception, and social development. American
Psychologist, 61, 192–203.10.1037/0003-066X.61.3.192

[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®]

[Google Scholar]

25. Molden, D.C., Plaks, J.E., & Dweck, C.S. (2006). “Meaningful” social inferences:
Effects of implicit theories on inferential processes. Journal of Experimental Social
Psychology, 42, 738–752.10.1016/j.jesp.2005.11.005
 [Crossref], [Web of Science ®]

[Google Scholar]

26. Mueller, C.M., & Dweck, C.S. (1998). Praise for intelligence can undermine
children’s motivation and performance. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 75, 33–52.10.1037/0022-3514.75.1.33

[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®]

[Google Scholar]

27. Narvaez, D. (2007). How cognitive and neurobiological sciences inform values
education for creatures like us. In D.N. Aspin & J.D. Chapman (Eds.), Values
education and lifelong learning (pp.127–146). Netherlands: Springer.10.1007/978-1-
4020-6184-4

[Crossref]

[Google Scholar]

28. Noddings, N. (1992). The challenge to care in schools: An alternative approach to

education. New York, NY: Teachers’ College Press.

[Google Scholar]

29. Paunesku, D. (2013). Scaled-up social psychology: Intervening wisely and broadly in
education(Doctoral Dissertation). Stanford University. Retrieved
fromhttps://web.stanford.edu/~paunesku/paunesku_2013.pdf

[Google Scholar]

30. Plaks, J.E., Levy, S.R., & Dweck, C.S. (2009). Lay theories of personality:
Cornerstones of meaning in social cognition. Social and Personal Psychology
Compass, 3, 1069–1081.10.1111/spco.2009.3.issue-6

[Crossref]

,
 [Google Scholar]

31. Rattan, A., Good, C., & Dweck, C.S. (2012). “It’s ok—Not everyone can be good at
math”: Instructors with entity theory comfort (and demotivate) students. Journal of
Experimental Psychology, 48, 731–737.

[Google Scholar]

32. Räty, H., Kasanen, K., Kiiskinen, J., Nykky, M., & Atjonen, P. (2004). Children’s’
notions of the malleability of their academic ability in the mother tongue and
Mathematics. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 48, 413–
426.10.1080/0031383042000245807

[Taylor & Francis Online]

[Google Scholar]

33. Rest, J. (1983). Morality. In P. Mussen (Ed.), Carmichael’s manual of child

psychology (4th ed.). Volume on Cognitive development (J. Flavell & E. Markman,
Vol. Eds., pp. 556–629). New York,NY: Wiley.

[Google Scholar]

34. Rissanen, I., Kuusisto, E., Hanhimäki, E., & Tirri, K. (2016). Teachers’ implicit
meaning systems and their implications for pedagogical thinking and practice: A
case study from Finland.Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research.
doi:10.1080/00313831.2016.1258667

[Taylor & Francis Online]

[Google Scholar]

35. Sahlberg, P. (2011). Finnish lessons: What can the world learn from educational
change in Finland?.New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

[Google Scholar]

36. Sanger, M.N. (2008). What we need to prepare teachers for the moral nature of their
work.Journal of Curriculum Studies, 40, 169–185.10.1080/00220270701670856
 [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®]

[Google Scholar]

37. Sanger, M., & Osguthorpe, R. (2005). Making sense of moral education. Journal of
Moral Education, 34, 57–71.10.1080/03057240500049323

[Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®]

[Google Scholar]

38. Sanger, M.N., & Osguthorpe, R.D. (2011). Teacher education, preservice teacher
beliefs, and the moral work of teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27, 569–
578.10.1016/j.tate.2010.10.011

[Crossref], [Web of Science ®]

[Google Scholar]

39. Shapira-Lishchinsky, O. (2011). Teachers’ critical incidents: Ethical dilemmas in

teaching practice.Teaching and Teacher Education, 27, 648–
656.10.1016/j.tate.2010.11.003

[Crossref], [Web of Science ®]

[Google Scholar]

40. Sockett, H. (1993). The moral base for teacher professionalism. New
York, NY: Teachers College Press.

[Google Scholar]

41. Stake, R.E. (2000). Case studies. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of
qualitative research (pp. 134–164). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.

[Google Scholar]
42. Tirri, K. (2011). Holistic school pedagogy and values: Finnish teachers’ and students’
perspectives. International Journal of Educational Research, 50, 159–165.

[Google Scholar]

43. Tirri, K. (2014). The last 40 years in Finnish teacher education. Journal of Education
for Teaching,23, 1–10.10.1080/02607476.2014.956545

[Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®]

[Google Scholar]

44. Tirri, K., & Husu, J. (2006). Pedagogical values behind teachers’ reflection of school
ethos. In M.Klein (Ed.), New teaching and teacher issues (pp. 163–182). New
York, NY: Nova Science publishers.

[Google Scholar]

45. Tirri, K., Husu, J., & Kansanen, P. (1999). The epistemological stance between the
knower and the known. Teaching and Teacher Education, 15, 911–
922.10.1016/S0742-051X(99)00034-7

[Crossref], [Web of Science ®]

[Google Scholar]

46. Tirri, K., & Kuusisto, E. (2013). How Finland serves gifted and talented
pupils. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 36, 84–
96.10.1177/0162353212468066

[Crossref]

[Google Scholar]

47. Tirri, K., Toom, A., & Husu, J. (2013). The moral matters of teaching: A Finnish
perspective. In C.J.Graig, P.C. Meijer, & J. Broeckmans (Eds.), From teacher
thinking to teachers and teaching: The evolution of a research community (pp. 223–
239). Bingley: Emerald Publishing.10.1108/art

[Crossref]
 ,

[Google Scholar]

48. Tochon, F.V. (2009). From video cases to video pedagogy: A framework for video
feedback and reflection in pedagogical research praxis.
In R. Goldman, R. Pea, B. Barron, & S.J. Derry (Eds.),Video research in the learning
sciences (pp. 53–56). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis Group.

[Google Scholar]

49. Uljens, M., & Nyman, C. (2013). Educational leadership in Finland or building a
nation withBildung. In L. Moos (Ed.), Transnational influence on values and practices
in Nordic Educational Leadership: Is there a Nordic Model? (pp. 31–48). Studies in
Educational Leadership 19. Dordrecht:Springer. Doi: 10.1007/978-94-007-6226-8_3

[Crossref]

[Google Scholar]

50. Van Manen, M. (1994). Pedagogy, virtue, and narrative identity in

teaching. Curriculum Inquiry,24, 135–170.10.1080/03626784.1994.11076157

[Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®]

[Google Scholar]

51. Vauclair, C.-M., Wilson, M., & Fischer, R. (2014). Cultural conceptions of morality:
Examining laypeople’s associations of moral character. Jounal of Moral
Education, 43, 54–74.

[Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®]

[Google Scholar]

52. Yeager, D. (2008). Adolescent mindsets and the education of ethical sensitivity.
In K. Tirri (Ed.),Educating moral sensibilities in urban schools (pp. 63–
78). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

[Google Scholar]