It
is widely accepted that social beliefs and judgements influence how people feel
and how they behave (Myers, Abell, Kolstad & Sani, 2010). It is through the study of social belief and
judgements that the question of teachers expectations, influencing pupil
performance has been researched since the 1940's. There are two main focus areas to this
question; why a teacher has these expectations
and who these expectations may or may not, effect. In this essay, these two
areas will be discussed, and evidence will be provided for this argument. A
summary will then conclude this discussion.
The
reasoning behind expectations is not always logical. Consequently, expectations
can be incorrect. Attractiveness of a
child is evidenced as a factor in this field. Results from a study regarding attractiveness
found that attractive children were afforded significantly favourable treatment
than children classed as unattractive (Langlois, Kalakanis, Rubenstein, Larson,
Hallam, & Smoot, 2000). Mathematics
ability was used in a study by Robinson-Cimpian, Lubienski, Ganley and Copur-Gencturk, (2014) to evaluate what
factors influence teacher expectations.
The focus of this study was gender. Data was taken from the Early
childhood longitudinal study ECLS and perceptions of boys and girls
mathematical aptitude were evaluated. It
was found that Boys are afforded a higher expectation in mathematics than girls. Furthermore, Madon, Jussim, & Eccles,
(1997) discuss the conceptual model with the following as reasons for
expectations, previous grades, previous test scores, motivation, self-esteem,
attractiveness, demographics, personality and home life.
Langlois,
Ritter, Roggman and Vaughn (1991) argue that expectations of teachers do
influence pupils performance because of teacher interactions and facial
expressions. Myers et al., (2010) state that when a teacher has higher
expectations of a pupil they look, smile, nod and interact with that pupil
more. In contrast to this, a videotaped experiment recorded various teachers
discussing something. Ten seconds of the
discussion was played back to viewers, with or without audio. Consequently, viewers
showed an expectancy detection effect as they recognised, by the teachers facial
expression, whether it was a good or poor student being discussed (Babad,
Bernieri, & Rosenthal, 1991). In a
study completed by (Montague & Walker-Andrews, 2001), it was evidenced that
infants understand the emotion expressed in the face. Furthermore, they often
match their emotions to other people's emotions based on the facial
expressions. It is, therefore, supported
that children of pre-school upwards can in-fact calculate what expectations the
teacher has for them and other pupils.
The
self-fulfilling prophecy (SFP),
(Rosenthal & Jacobson, 1968) also support that expectations do
influence performance. The Pygmalion in the classroom study is a good example
of SFP and has stood the test of time.
Rosenthal (1968) stated that "the self-fulfilling prophecy was in
evidence primarily at [younger years] the lower grade levels. This prophecy has
since been re-examined in several contexts now giving it much more depth. Madon
& Jussim (1997) studied naturally occurring SFP to examine whether positive
or negative expectations produced more powerful SFP. Their research model assumed that the teacher
expectations would influence performance. With this in mind, they investigated,
using different contexts as follows; do high or low expectations produce more
powerful SFP; do expectations that match targets self-conception...provide a
more powerful SFP; are targets of low self-concept more susceptible to SFP; Are
low achievers more susceptible to SFP?
The key question they were asking overall, was which expectation, and in
which situation made the biggest influence on performance. Their study found
that low achievers were much more vulnerable to SFP. Although this cannot be generalised, the SFP
is supported within the low achievers group.
Bohlmann
& Weinstein (2013) created a more advanced study, putting the classroom
into the context. Other contexts were evaluated however the key focus was on
highly differentiated classrooms and low differentiated classrooms. They took teacher ratings of students and
self-reported student ratings. It was
found that in 'highly differentiated' classrooms the low achiever, student
rating matched the teacher expectation, however in 'low differentiated' classes
it was not significant. It was also
found that in 'highly differentiated' classrooms Teacher expectation did match
the pupils actual performance in mathematics although, again, it did not occur
as often in 'low differentiated' classroom environments. In support of the SFP, Again, the low
achievers are highly influenced by teacher expectations, suffice to add that
this is only in high differentiated environments.
Moreover,
a longitudinal study also supports that low achievers are influenced. Using Reading, writing and verbal
communication abilities as a tool to evaluate the influence of expectations, data
was taken from ten sites within the National Institute of Child Care and Human
Development (NICHD). The meta-analysis
demonstrated that academic achievement in high school is influenced by
teachers, high or low, misinterpretations (expectations) in first grade. These
teachers expectations of abilities were found to influence students.
Consequently, vulnerable pupils, including
pupils from low-status backgrounds, low achievers and minority students, for up
to ten years (Sorhagen, 2013). Sorhagen did, however, state that parents
expectations may also play a part in performance.
To
conclude, when looking at reasoning behind teacher expectations, these study's
imply that factors out with the student's control recurrently influence these
misjudgements. Therefore, leading to these expectations. Reasoning behind
teacher expectations needs to be included and evaluated when investigating this
area as they do support sorhagens' statement regarding teacher expectations
being misinterpretations. Furthermore student performance results, must take
into account outside factors such as environment, self-esteem, ability,
academic level, age, and parent expectations (Langlois et al., 2000; Robinson-Cimpian et al., 2014; Madon &
Jussim, 1997). Only then can it be clarified if the sole responsibility for
performance is influenced by teacher expectation.
In
saying this, It is however abundantly clear that Teachers expectations do have
an influence on student performance. This does, however, seem highly focused
around more vulnerable pupils such as minority groups, low-income pupils and
younger children. It is also extremely visible when looking at the results from
these studies; that low achievers are impacted greatly in many of these
studies.
References
Babad,
E., Bernieri, F., & Rosenthal, R. (1991). Students as Judges of Teachers'
Verbal and Nonverbal Behavior. American
Educational Research Journal, 28(1), 211-234.
Bohlmann,
N., & Weinstein, R. (2013). Classroom context, teacher expectations, and
cognitive level: Predicting children's math ability judgments. Journal Of Applied Developmental Psychology,
34(6), 288-298.
Langlois,
J., Ritter, J., Roggman, L., & Vaughn, L. (1991). Facial diversity and
infant preferences for attractive faces. Developmental
Psychology, 27(1), 79-84.
Langlois,
J., Kalakanis, L., Rubenstein, A., Larson, A., Hallam, M., & Smoot, M.
(2000). Maxims or myths of beauty? A meta-analytic and theoretical review. Psychological Bulletin, 126(3), 390-423.
Madon,
S., Jussim, L., & Eccles, J. (1997). In search of the powerful
self-fulfilling prophecy. Journal Of
Personality And Social Psychology, 72(4), 791-809.
Myers,
D., Abell, J., Kolstad, A., & Sani, F. (2010). Attitudes and behaviour.
Jacobs, N. Rotherham, J. (1st Ed) Social psychology
(pp. 146-155). Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill.
Robinson-Cimpian,
J., Lubienski, S., Ganley, C., & Copur-Gencturk, Y. (2014). Teachers'
perceptions of students' mathematics proficiency may exacerbate early gender
gaps in achievement. Developmental Psychology,
50(4), 1262-1281.
Rosenthal,
R., & Jacobson, L. (1968). Pygmalion in the classroom. The Urban Review, 3(1), 16-20.
Sorhagen,
N. (2013). Early teacher expectations disproportionately affect poor children's
high school performance. Journal Of Educational
Psychology, 105(2), 465-477.
Montague,
D., & Walker-Andrews, A. (2001). Peekaboo: A new look at infants'
perception of emotion expressions. Developmental
Psychology, 37(6), 826-838.
