“I Wouldn't Have Seen it If I Hadn't Believed it”

Abstract

38 students enrolled in an introductory special education class in education of the emotionally disturbed were randomly assigned to two treatment conditions, a normal (control) condition and low expectancy condition. These teacher trainees participated in a two phase study. During phase 1 the teachers were asked to rate a hypothetical normal child (control group) or a hypothetical emotionally disturbed child (low expectancy group) on two dependent measures developed for this research. During phase 2, both groups independently viewed a videotape of the same normal child. The control group was told the child was normal; the low expectancy group was told the child was emotionally disturbed. Both groups completed the same dependent measures following observation of the child. Differences between the groups in both phases indicate that teacher trainees hold negative stereotypical expectations of children labeled emotionally disturbed. Observations of normal behavior alter these expectations to some extent, but the negative halo of the label still results in more negative perceptions of behavior than when the child is labeled normal.

Preliminary evaluation of various training components on accuracy of Direct Behavior Ratings

“…That is, informants may differ with regard to sensitivity and tolerance for behavior, ability to deal with behavioral differences, and in expectations regarding behavior. As an example, investigations by Foster and Salvia (1977) and Foster, Ysseldyke, and Reese (1975) were reviewed to demonstrate how teacher ratings of student behavior became more inflated following provision of a "label" about the child. Taken together, Edelbrock (1983) reminded us that ratings represent not only child behavior but also informant characteristics.…”

The ADHD label, analogue methodology, and participants' geographic location on judgments of social and attentional skills

“…There was a significant effect across the three professional groups on the interpersonal relations variable with the seriously emotionally disturbed label eliciting the poorest judgments compared to any other label except socially maladjusted. In a similar manner, Foster and colleagues (Foster & Ysseldyke, 1976;Foster, Ysseldyke, & Reese, 1975;Ysseldyke & Foster, 1978) examined the effects of a variety of diagnostic labels on educators' ratings of a hypothetical child's expectations. The results across these studies consistently found that the educators' ratings were more negative for the children who had the labels learning disabled, emotionally disturbed, and educable mentally retarded than for those who were identified as normal.…”

“…Other researchers have found that teachers rated attractive children more favorably than unattractive children (Ross & Salvia, 1975), Black children as having more behavior problems than White children (Lindholm, Touliatos, & Rich, 1978), children of diverse backgrounds as requiring special education services more often than White children (Obiakor, 1999), and special class placement for Mexican American children as being more appropriate than for Caucasian children (Zucker & Prieto, 1977). Consequently, teachers report more negative expectations of children who are given special education labels (Algozzine, Mercer, & Countermine, 1977;Boomer & King, 1981;Foster, Ysseldyke, & Reese, 1975;Hobbs, 1975;Sutherland & Algozzine, 1979). Gillung and Rucker (1977) reported in their investigation of regular and special education teachers' perceptions of children with a label, teachers perceived the labeled child as having more severe academic and behavioral problems and requiring more intensive special services than the same child described without a label.…”

A Study of Gender Discrimination in a Primary Programme of Teacher Training

“…The concern is, however, that as student teachers are 'taught' these 'facts' as a part of their professional socialisation, then it is probable that such messages will be internalised and will effect their future expectations of boys behaviour and reading capabilities. Indeed, some work carried out by Foster et al (1975) demonstrated that what trainee teachers are told, they tend to believe. In this study two groups of special education teacher trainees watched a video of the same, normal child.…”