CCSR five-category framework of noncognitive factors

Product or Programme · All products and programmes
Evidence · 12 claims (10 for, 2 mixed) · 7 studies (3 associational, 2 review, 1 causal, 1 quant-synthesis), q2–q4 · 1 of 7 report an effect size · 11 claims rest on one study

Description

A research-synthesis framework developed by the University of Chicago Consortium on Chicago School Research (CCSR) that organises noncognitive factors into academic behaviors, academic perseverance, social skills, learning strategies, and academic mindsets.

Components

• Five-category taxonomy of noncognitive factors related to academic performance: The review defines noncognitive factors broadly, going "beyond a narrow reference to skills and include strategies, attitudes, and behaviors," and organizes the literature into "five general categories of noncognitive factors related to academic performance: 1) academic behaviors, 2) academic perseverance, 3) academic mindsets, 4) learning strategies, and 5) social skills." Each category is defined and its evidence reviewed in separate chapters, using students' course grades as the outcome of interest. The taxonomy reconciles loosely defined constructs across economics, psychology, and sociology. (Farrington et al. (2012))
• Hypothesized model of noncognitive factors shaping academic performance: The article builds on a hypothesized model (Farrington et al., 2012, Figure 1) in which five categories of noncognitive factors—academic behaviors, academic perseverance, academic mindsets, learning strategies, and social skills—interact to produce academic performance. The authors hypothesized that "teachers' instructional practices and the conditions for learning that they create inside the classroom would directly influence students' academic mindsets and learning strategies... and indirectly influence downstream outcomes of academic perseverance, academic behaviors, and grades." The present study empirically tested three components of this model: classroom environments, selected noncogni (Camille A. Farrington et al. (2019))
• Hypothesized model of noncognitive factors acting through behaviors within classroom and socio-cultural context: The review proposes that mindsets give rise to perseverance, which manifests through academic behaviors, which shape academic performance — with academic behaviors as the proximal channel: "academic behaviors are most proximal to one's performance in school," and "virtually all other noncognitive factors work through academic behaviors to affect performance." The model is nested in School and Classroom Context and a larger Socio-Cultural Context including student background characteristics. Arrows are one-way only for simplicity; the authors anticipate reciprocal relationships and that "the actual relationships among these factors are no doubt messier and more complex than indicated in the i (Farrington et al. (2012))

Claims

• Noncognitive factors have a direct positive relationship to students' school performance and future outcomes [+M]
• Academic behaviors have the most immediate effect on course grades; directly targeting grit is not an evidenced lever [+W]
• Course grades and GPA predict high school and college outcomes better than standardized test scores or coursework [+W]
• Best leverage points for improving performance lie in teacher strategies for classroom context, mindsets, and learning strategies [+W]
• Positive academic mindsets increase perseverance and academic behaviors, yielding higher grades; negative mindsets produce a self-defeating cycle [+W]
• Classroom environment has a small positive within-student relationship with course grades that is mediated by student noncognitive factors [+M]
• Classroom environment is positively associated with students' self-reported motivation and other noncognitive factors within students [+W]
• Student-by-classroom interaction accounts for a substantial share of variation in noncognitive factors, indicating context-specific malleability [+W]
• Within-student differences in noncognitive factors are associated with differences in course grades across the same student's classes [+W]
• Teachers who are effective at improving academic behaviors and mindsets are often not the same teachers who raise math test scores [+W]
• Child and guardian reports add minimal predictive power beyond teacher reports of noncognitive skills [~W]
• Growth-mindset interventions have weak average effects on achievement, including a negligible GPA gain (d = 0.11) for lower-achieving US ninth-graders in one preregistered national trial [~M]

Related Products and Programmes

• Mirenda's four-aspect framework for classroom participation

Key Sources

• Jenny Nagaoka, Camille A. Farrington, Melissa Roderick, Elaine Allensworth, Tasha Seneca Keyes, David W. Johnson, and Nicole O. Beechum. (2013). Readiness for College: The Role of Noncognitive Factors and Context. VUE (Voices in Urban Education), Fall 2013. https://www.annenberginstitute.org
• Farrington, C.A., Roderick, M., Allensworth, E., Nagaoka, J., Keyes, T.S., Johnson, D.W., & Beechum, N.O. (2012). Teaching adolescents to become learners. The role of noncognitive factors in shaping school performance: A critical literature review. Chicago: University of Chicago Consortium on Chicago School Research. https://consortium.uchicago.edu/publications/teaching-adolescents-become-learners-role-noncognitive-factors-shaping-school
• Camille A. Farrington, Shanette Porter, Joshua Klugman. (2019). Do Classroom Environments Matter for Noncognitive Aspects of Student Performance and Students' Course Grades? University of Chicago Consortium on School Research. https://consortium.uchicago.edu/publications/do-classroom-environments-matter-for-noncognitive-aspects-of-student-performance-and-students-course-grades

Page metadata

Field	Value
type	product
id	ccsr-five-category-framework-of-noncognitive-factors
title	CCSR five-category framework of noncognitive factors
description	A research-synthesis framework developed by the University of Chicago Consortium on Chicago School Research (CCSR) that organises noncognitive factors into academic behaviors, academic perseverance, social skills, learning strategies, and academic mindsets.
status	review
moved_from	theory/farrington-five-noncognitive-factor-categories, theory/noncognitive-factors-hypothesized-model, theory/noncognitive-factors-hypothesized-model-farrington
product_kind	framework
generated	by process:settle-candidates on 2026-10-09
trust	unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content
sources	2 — farrington-2012, camille-a-farrington-2019

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.