Exploring Students’ Mindset in Learning Real Analysis: Challenges, Responses, and Learning Experiences
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.30605/proximal.v9i4.9958Keywords:
Growth Mindset, Real Analysis, Students' Beliefs, Proof Learning, Mathematics EducationAbstract
Students’ beliefs about mathematical ability may shape how they interpret difficulty and respond to unsuccessful attempts, particularly in proof-oriented courses such as Real Analysis. Previous studies have documented that learning Real Analysis can involve substantial affective and cognitive challenges, including frustration, anxiety, and difficulties in constructing formal mathematical proofs. This study explored mathematics education students’ mindsets in learning Real Analysis by examining their responses to a Likert-scale questionnaire and five open-ended questions. The participants were 16 fifth-semester students enrolled in the Real Analysis course in the Mathematics Education Program at IAIN Kerinci, Indonesia. Data were collected during the odd semester of the 2026/2027 academic year using a questionnaire consisting of 23 closed-ended items on a four-point Likert scale and five open-ended questions. The questionnaire used a four-point response scale and covered beliefs about mathematical ability, responses to challenges, effort and persistence, and feedback, learning, and improvement. Open-ended responses were examined thematically to identify students’ perceived challenges, beliefs about their abilities, coping strategies, interpretations of feedback, and reported changes in perspective. Descriptive questionnaire patterns suggested an overall growth-oriented tendency. The quantitative findings showed mean scores of 2.78 for beliefs about mathematical ability, 2.55 for responses to challenges, 2.98 for effort, failure, and persistence, and 2.88 for feedback, learning, and improvement. These scores indicate varying degrees of growth-oriented responses across the four dimensions rather than a uniformly strong growth mindset. The qualitative analysis identified five themes: perceived challenges in understanding formal definitions and mathematical proofs; beliefs about mathematical abilities; strategies for coping with learning difficulties; interpretations of feedback and assessment; and perceived changes in learning perspectives. Students reported using strategies such as reviewing concepts, practicing problems, seeking assistance, and adjusting learning approaches, although some also experienced self-doubt, frustration, and difficulty sustaining their efforts. The findings suggest that growth-oriented beliefs can coexist with uncertainty and avoidance in demanding mathematical situations. These findings highlight the importance of instructional practices that provide structured scaffolding for mathematical proof construction, opportunities to revise unsuccessful attempts, and formative feedback that emphasizes students' learning processes.
References
Ahn, W. K., & Sheu, C. K. (2026). Calibrating Growth Mindset About Intelligence: Increased Blame, Effort Misperception, And A Genes-And-Growth Solution For Blame. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001944
Bennett, A. B., & Lai, Y. (2025). Gatekeeper Or Gateway? Lessons Learned From Students In A Real Analysis Course. PRIMUS, 35(3), 287–307. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511970.2025.2476674
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2022). Conceptual And Design Thinking For Thematic Analysis. Qualitative psychology, 9(1), 3. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/qup0000196
Bui, P., Pongsakdi, N., McMullen, J., Lehtinen, E., & Hannula-Sormunen, M. M. (2023). A Systematic Review Of Mindset Interventions In Mathematics Classrooms: What Works And What Does Not? Educational Research Review, 40, 100554. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100554
Dweck, C. S., & Yeager, D. S. (2021). A Growth Mindset About Intelligence. In G. M. Walton & A. J. Crum (Eds.), Handbook Of Wise Interventions: How Social Psychology Can Help People Change (pp. 9–35). The Guilford Press. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2020-23031-001
Guo, C., Patel, M., Mehta, A., Kothari, K., Lu, T., Voss, N., ... & Ranade, G. (2026). LeanSide: A Formally Verified Co-Reasoning System for Natural-language Proofs. arXiv preprint arXiv:2610.00760. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.00760
Krupnik, V., Fukawa-Connelly, T., & Weber, K. (2018). Students’ Epistemological Frames And Their Interpretation Of Lectures In Advanced Mathematics. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 49, 174–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2017.12.001
Mejía-Ramos, J. P., Lew, K., de la Torre, J., & Weber, K. (2017). Developing And Validating Proof Comprehension Tests In Undergraduate Mathematics. Research in Mathematics Education, 19(2), 130–146. https://doi.org/10.1080/14794802.2017.1325776
Melhuish, K. M., Wrightsman, E. M., Guajardo, L. R., Lew, K. M., & Weber, K. (2025). A gendered-language analysis of abstract algebra, real analysis, and introduction to proof textbooks. In Proceedings of the 27th Annual Conference on Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education.
Powers, R. A., Craviotto, C., & Grassl, R. M. (2010). Impact Of Proof Validation On Proof Writing In Abstract Algebra. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 41(4), 501–514. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207390903564603
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
Tempelaar, D., Giesbers, B., Rienties, B., Bátori, A., & Mihai, A. (2026). Combining Dispositional And Behavioural Facets of SRL, And The Role of Students’ Growth Orientation. Educational Psychology, 46(3), 350-371. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2025.2592750
Vrasetya, A., & Nasution, E. Y. P. (2026). Analisis Mathematics Anxiety Ditinjau Dari Tipe Kepribadian Sensing Dan Intuiting. Proximal: Jurnal Penelitian Matematika Dan Pendidikan Matematika, 9(1), 139-147. https://doi.org/10.30605/proximal.v9i1.7750
Vrasetya, A., Nasution, E. Y. P., & Sari, M. (2025). Transformasi Kecemasan Menjadi Antusiasme: Bimbingan Belajar Matematika Interaktif Berbasis Komunitas Untuk Siswa SD. ABDI KARSA: Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat, 2(2), 51-61. https://ejournal.unitaspalembang.ac.id/index.php/abdikarsa/article/view/604
Vrasetya, A., Nasution, E. Y. P., & Handican, R. (2024). Response Of Prospective Mathematics Teacher Students To Learning Difficulties In Calculus Course. Mathline: Jurnal Matematika dan Pendidikan Matematika, 9(3), 645-660. https://doi.org/10.31943/mathline.v9i3.602
Walton, G. M., & Crum, A. J. (Eds.). (2020). Handbook Of Wise Interventions. Guilford Publications.
Weber, K. (2023). Instructions And Constructions In Set Theory Proofs. Synthese, 202(2), 34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-023-04239-7
Weber, K. (2015). Effective Proof Reading Strategies For Comprehending Mathematical Proofs. International Journal of Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education, 1(3), 289-314. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40753-015-0011-0
Yeager, D. S., & Dweck, C. S. (2020). What Can Be Learned From Growth Mindset Controversies?. American psychologist, 75(9), 1269. https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/amp0000794
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Eline Yanty Putri Nasution, Darmono Darmono, Siswantoyo Siswantoyo

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
In submitting the manuscript to the journal, the authors certify that:
- They are authorized by their co-authors to enter into these arrangements.
- The work described has not been formally published before, except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture, review, thesis, or overlay journal.
- That it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere,
- That its publication has been approved by all the author(s) and by the responsible authorities – tacitly or explicitly – of the institutes where the work has been carried out.
- They secure the right to reproduce any material that has already been published or copyrighted elsewhere.
- They agree to the following license and copyright agreement.
License and Copyright Agreement
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.












