An intervention study



Introductions
◦ Teachers
◦ Researchers
Outline of the project
◦ Questions
◦ Understandings/expectations






9.45 – Research background:
◦ Rosenthal
◦ Teacher behaviours
◦ Student characteristics: Gender, social class, ethnicity
10.30 – Morning tea
11.00 – Characteristics:
◦ Student characteristics: ethnicity
◦ Teacher characteristics: Babad, Weinstein, Rubie-Davies
12.15 – Lunch
1.15 – Whole class expectations:
◦ The evidence
◦ View/analyse own videos
◦ Areas for development: grouping and learning experiences, motivation and evaluation, class climate and student responsibility for learning
◦ Identification of areas for growth


Rosenthal and Jacobson
◦ Rosenthal and rats
◦ Experimenter effects
◦ Expectations in classrooms
◦ Pygmalion in the classroom
◦ Conclusions
◦ Controversy

Formation of
Class
Expectations
Teacher
Beliefs
Socioemotional Environment
Opportunities to Learn
Instructional
Practices
Student
Outcomes:
Social/Academic
Instructional Environment






Formation of expectations
Personality correlates of teachers
Transmission of differential expectations
Student perceptions
Educational and social outcomes

Greater influences Lesser influences





Portfolio information
Gender
Ethnicity
Social class
Diagnostic labels






Attractiveness
Siblings
Names
Language style
Personality and social skills
Teacher/ student background

3.
4.
5.
6.
1.
2.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Wait time less for lows
Give lows the answer/ ask someone else
Inappropriate reinforcement
Criticising lows for failure
Praise lows less for success
Fail to provide feedback to public response of lows
Pay less attention to/ interact less with lows
Call on lows less frequently
Seat lows farther from the teacher
Demand less from lows
11.
12.
13.
closely
Differential grading of tests
14.
15.
with lows
Less informative feedback to lows
Lows receive less eye
16.
17.
communication
Less intrusive instruction of highs
Less use of effective

Brophy (1985) behaviours towards low expectancy students





 not helping enough to improve students’ answers praising incorrect answers or inappropriate behaviours demanding less of them shorter and less informative feedback less intrusive instruction less use of timeconsuming instructional methods
Good and Weinstein (1986) teachers provided less capable students with:




 less opportunity to perform publicly less opportunity to think and analyse less choice on assignments/ tasks less autonomy and more frequent monitoring more gratuitous and less contingent feedback


Development of research into teacher differential behaviour

Positives and negatives related to teacher differential behaviour


Climate

Feedback

Input

Output


Stronger effects for affective climate and instructional input

A smaller effect for output

A practically negligible effect for differential feedback behaviours

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
What are the specific types of differential behaviours?
What is the ideological legitimacy and educational desirability of each type of differential behaviour?
Which group of students receives an advantage from each type of teacher differential behaviour?
What is the teachers’ natural tendency and how would they wish to deal with particular students and different groups of students?
To what extent are teachers able to control their specific verbal and non-verbal behaviours?


The components of the theory clash

Affective displays and actual feelings

Controlling affective displays: verbal and non-verbal


Do students perceive teacher differential behaviour?

Interpreting behaviours differently

Perceptions of teacher interactions


Is there agreement in relation to degrees of learning support?

Is there agreement in relation to degrees of emotional support?


Effects on students

Classroom climate and morale

Fairness and equity

Social comparison process is powerful and prevalent in schools


Adams (1965)
◦ Balance between what we put in and what we get out
◦ Influenced by others

Sense of justice


Student characteristics
◦ Ethnicity

Teacher characteristics
◦ High bias and low bias teachers: Babad
◦ High differentiating and low differentiating teachers: Weinstein
◦ High expectation and low expectation teachers:
Rubie-Davies





Gender
Ethnicity
Social class
Diagnostic labels






Physical attractiveness
Language style
Personality and social skills
Teacher/student background
Names
Other siblings








Primary school girls
Secondary school boys – maths, science
Ability/effort
Teacher interactions
PE
Reading and language
Social behaviour





Middle class students are expected to perform at higher levels than lower social class
Low social class are vulnerable to teacher expectations
Some evidence teachers’ assessments for lower class are accurate but over-rate middle class
But what about NZ?


Expectations vary according to whether or not a child has a label, e.g. ADHD

Stinnett (2001): 144 preservice teachers
◦ ADHD, no label; Ritalin, in Special Ed
◦ Description of child; vignette
Rubie-Davies







Physical attractiveness
Language style
Personality and social skills
Teacher/student background
Names
Siblings
Rubie-Davies






African American/ White students
Hispanic/ White students
Vulnerability
UK
But what about NZ?
◦ St George (1983) academic
◦ Stoddart (1998) social skills
◦ Rubie-Davies, Hattie, Hamilton (2006)
Rubie-Davies



Rubie-Davies (2006) British Journal of
Educational Psychology
21 teachers
◦ 540 students
 261 NZ European
 88 Maori
 91 PI
 94 Asian
Rubie-Davies




Expectation survey
◦ 1-7 Likert scale
Teacher judgement of student achievement
Running records
Rubie-Davies

Expectation and achievem ent by ethnicity
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
NZ European Maori Pacific Island
Student ethnicity
Asian
Rubie-Davies
Expectation
Achievement 1

6
5
4
3
2
1
0
NZ European
Teacher judgem ent and student achievem ent by ethnicity
Maori
Ethnicity
Pacific Island Asian
Judgement
Achievement 2
Rubie-Davies

3 3.2
Effect Size Gain by Ethnicity in Reading
3.4
0.5
3.6
3.8
0.45
0.4
0.35
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
4
0.1
0.05
0
Teacher Expectation
4.2
4.4
4.6
4.8
NZ European
Maori
Pacific Island
Asian
Rubie-Davies





Teacher expectations
◦ Ethnicity or social class?
Societal stereotypes
Lowered expectations
◦ Effect on pedagogy
 Lesson pace
 Structured environment
 Ability
Self-fulfilling prophecy effect/ sustaining expectation effect
Rubie-Davies


Prejudice (bias) is a negative attitude

A stereotype is a generalisation, a belief








A belief about the personal attributes of a group of people
Stereotypes are sometimes over-generalised, inaccurate and resistant to new information
Stereotypes are shortcuts
Stereotypes are biased
Problems with the use of stereotypes
Prejudice: A set of negative stereotypes loaded with aggression and strong emotions carrying the idea that ‘we’ are better than
‘them’







Often based on commonly held stereotypes
What is teacher bias?
Objectivity appears to be difficult
Experimental vs naturalistic studies?
Reversed bias
Reducing bias


Babad (1998) Draw-a-Person Intelligence test
◦ One-sixth of teachers objective
◦ One half mildly biased
◦ One-quarter highly biased
◦ A small proportion reverse biased


In theory

In practice

Personality questionnaire

Classroom behaviour


Elisha Babad

Rhona Weinstein

Christine Rubie-Davies


Preferential affect is at the heart of the teacher expectation issue

Identified high and low bias teachers


Video clips

Ten-second exposure

Babad’s studies in elementary and secondary schools and at university


Babad et al, 1989; 1991; Babad & Taylor,
1992
◦ Adult judges of teacher non-verbal behaviour
◦ What young students perceived in teachers’ nonverbal behaviour
◦ Students from different grade levels
◦ In Israel and New Zealand
◦ Students made guesses about the student the teacher was talking to or about
◦ Results


Students live different lives in one classroom

Student perceptions of differential treatment in the classroom

High achievers

Favoured in teacher interactions

Higher expectations

More opportunity and more choice
Low achievers

Receive more frequent negative feedback

More teacher-directed treatment






Teacher is the defining agent of ability not themselves, peers or parents
Public incidents
Importance of nonverbal cues
Children relate smartness to conforming behaviour and fast completion of work
Effects on children’s feelings







Ways in which students are grouped for instruction
Materials and activities through which the curriculum is taught
Evaluation system that teachers use to assess learning
Motivational system used to engage students
Responsibility that students have in directing and evaluating learning
Climate of relationships within the class, with parents and with the school







Ability grouping
Highly differentiated curriculum
Intelligence is fixed
Learning for external reward
Teacher as director
Teacher as academic instructor






Variety of grouping
Challenging learning experiences
Intelligence is malleable
Learning for personal growth
Teacher as facilitator
Teacher as socialiser


The question is not, what is it about students that mean teachers have high or low expectations for them; the question we should be asking is, what is it about teachers that means some have high or low expectations for all their students?


What do we portray in our verbal and nonverbal behaviour?

Lie to Me video clip


What kinds of messages are you delivering to students? Verbally/ non-verbally?

Is there any evidence of bias?

What is it like for students to be in your class?

What does your body language tell students?

Teacher Expectation and Student Achievement
Mean expectation and achievement
4
3
2
1
0
7
6
5
1 2 3 4 5
Teacher number
6 7 8 9
Reading exp
Reading ach 1

0 1 2
Effect Size Gain vs Expectation in Reading
1.6
1.4
3
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
4
0.2
0
-0.2
Teacher Expectation
5 6 7
HiEx Group
LoEx Group

S t u d e n t S e l f P e r c e p t i o n s i n R e a d i n g a n d M a t h s
2 9
2 8
3 1
3 0
3 4
3 3
3 2
Readi ng Hi E x Readi ng LoE x M at hs Hi E x
S t u d e n t s e l f p e r c e p t i o n s b y t e a c h e r t y p e
M at hs LoE x
B egi nni ng y ear
E nd y ear

Student Perception of Teacher Opinion of their Performance
8.8
8.6
8.4
8.2
8
Means
7.8
7.6
7.4
7.2
7
High
Teacher Expectation of Students
Low
Beginning of Year
End of Year



Luke: “A lot of repetition, every day…until they can start recalling their basic number facts.”
Hannah: “They need activities that are challenging so they are motivated. If I don’t make them independent as well [as the high ability students] they won’t learn to run by themselves. They’ll always need the teacher.”


Teaching statements: orienting students to the lesson, introducing and explaining new concepts, using student prior knowledge

Feedback to students

Open and closed questions

Positive and negative behaviour management

Procedural statements


High expectation teachers: a facilitative approach

Low expectation teachers: a directive approach











Mixed ability groupings
Worked with a variety of peers
Well-defined learning goals
Responsibility for learning
Choices in learning experiences
Intrinsically motivated
Frequent feedback
Answering open questions that challenged thinking
Extended explanations of new concepts
Positive social climate











Teacher defined activities
Extrinsically motivated
Worked in ability groups
Little mixed ability interaction
Less ownership of learning
Unsure of learning direction
Answering closed questions
Limited explanations of concepts
Plenty of procedural directions
Negative social climate







Grouping
Learning activities
Classroom climate
Student responsibility
Motivation
Evaluation


Teacher journals
◦ Comments on the day – how are you feeling?
 Did you learn anything?
 Did anything surprise you?
 Did you enjoy the day?
 What will you take back to your class?
 Anything you are thinking about changing?
◦ Possible areas for development?