How can Inherent (vs. Extrinsic) Explanations for Differences in the Classroom Amplify Academic Inequalities?

• In Event: The Antecedents & Consequences of Structural Explanations for Social Disparities

Abstract

Classroom settings make visible differences in achievement between children. There is evidence that children do notice these differences and try to explain them (Cimpian, 2017). Research suggests that children’s explanations for differences in the classroom are biased toward inherent factors – (e.g., intelligence and motivation) rather than extrinsic explanations (e.g., social background, for a review see Goudeau & Cimpian, in press). In this presentation, we propose that this inherence bias in children’s explanations is likely to make social comparisons threatening for children that experience difficulty, and consequently amplify academic inequalities. Indeed, interpreting differences in achievement as resulting from differences in ability jeopardizes students’ self-images and interfere with performance. Because children from marginalized backgrounds, such as working-class or ethnic minority children, are more likely to experience difficulty and be outperformed by their peers (due, in part, to having less familiarity with academic tasks), the inherence bias should amplify group inequalities in the classroom. To support this claim, we present two studies in which we manipulated students’ familiarity with a new academic task (Goudeau & Croizet, 2017).
In Study 1 (N= 131 French fifth graders), we manipulated the level of familiarity with a new academic task that involved learning a new writing code. Two levels of familiarity with this new arbitrary code were operationalized before students took a coding test without their being aware of it. We also manipulated the visibility of differences in achievement in the classroom (i.e., social comparison). In one condition of the test, students had to raise their hands each time they completed a word. There was no such requirement in the other condition, which minimized the visibility of differences in performance. We hypothesized that having students raise their hands to signal completion should be detrimental to the achievement of their peers who were less familiar with the new task. Our results show that in the condition where the performance differences were visible, the students who are less familiar with the new academic task performed worse than those in the condition where the performance differences were not visible, amplifying initial disparities between children.
In Study 2 (N= 136 French fifth graders), our goal was to show that the way students explain the differences in the classroom undermines the achievement of the students who are the least familiar with academic standards. As in Study 1, we implemented two conditions of familiarity before that students took a coding test, except that all students were required to raise a hand if they finished before the allotted time. However, we manipulated the explanation for differences in achievement. In one condition, students were informed that some of their peers were more familiar with the task because they had benefited from better training earlier while the other condition, the advantage in familiarity remained hidden. Results showed that providing students with extrinsic explanations, by making them aware of the (dis)advantage conferred to some of them, prevents the less familiar students from a threating interpretation of their underachievement as a lack of ability and restores their performance.

Author

• Sébastien Goudeau
  Presenting Author