Roles of socioeconomic status, ethnicity and teacher beliefs in academic grading

Abstract

Background: Educational outcomes in the United Kingdom vary as a function of students' family background, with those of lower socioeconomic status (SES) and certain ethnic minority groups among the worst affected. Aims: This pre-registered study investigates: (i) whether knowledge about students' socioeconomic and ethnic background influences teachers' judgements about the quality of their work and potential for the future, and (ii) the role of teachers' beliefs-most notably about meritocracy-in their practices. Sample: Our findings are based on the responses of 416 in-service (88%) and trainee (12%) teachers who successfully passed several stringent exclusion criteria. Methods: As part of a 2 × 2 independent measures design, teachers were randomly assigned to assess an identical piece of work ostensibly written by a student who varied by SES (higher vs. lower) and ethnicity (White British vs. Black Caribbean). Following this, they responded to several measures assessing their beliefs about education. Results: Teachers judged students of lower SES to be inferior to students of higher SES across a range of indicators. By contrast, we found no evidence of racial bias in teachers' judgements, though potential reasons for this are discussed. Teachers who believed that schooling is meritocratic were significantly less likely to support equity-enhancing teaching practices and initiatives. Conclusions: Unconscious teacher biases and beliefs may be contributing to the relative underperformance of students from poorer backgrounds. These findings provide a mandate for educational institutions to help teachers reflect upon, and develop the skills required to mitigate potentially harmful biases.

The promise and pitfalls of a strength-based approach to child poverty and neurocognitive development: Implications for policy

“…Adopting a strength-based lens highlights the need for solutions that focus on larger, systemic factors that give rise to educational inequity, including important biases embedded across schools’ policies and practices (e.g., Autin et al, 2019 ; Doyle et al, 2023 ; Goudeau et al, 2023 , Goudeau et al, 2024 ; Stephens et al, 2014 , see also Destin, 2020 ). Critically, such biases influence children’s own biases of themselves, as one recent qualitative study noted ( Heberle et al, 2018 ).…”

An Early Intervention in Gestural Communication in Chilean Children from Psychosocially At-Risk Backgrounds and Its Impact on Language Skills at 18 Months Old

“…The children's teachers answered this inventory, and only the first three subscales were applied for this study. However, the previous literature showed negative biases in the perception of teachers of students who belonged to a more disadvantaged SES in terms of lower expectations about their performance (Doyle et al 2023;Filp 1995;Sneyers and Mahieu 2020). Therefore, the CDI was applied in two moments: at the beginning and when the children were 18 months of age, and the growth delta was calculated for each child to control this bias (growth delta = 18-month score − initial score).…”

Unequal selves in the classroom: Nature, origins, and consequences of socioeconomic disparities in children’s self-views.

“…Negative stereotypes about children from low-SES backgrounds can also be expressed through teachers’ grading practices. In an experiment with teachers from England and Wales (Doyle et al, 2023), teachers read the student record of a 10–11-year-old child, who allegedly was from a high- or a low-SES background. Teachers then evaluated the child’s work.…”