Systematic differences across evaluation schemes and educational choice

Rangvid, Beatrice Schindler

doi:10.1016/j.econedurev.2015.05.003

Cited by 23 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 18 publications

(20 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Indeed, our theoretical approach is precisely that institutional norms and functions shape their agents' behaviors; thus, the observed effects should be reproducible with actual teachers, as they have been socialized in the very context that we have experimentally induced in this research. Furthermore, previous research using role-playing paradigms showed that participants adjust their attitudes to the role (Covington & Omelich, 1979;Harari & Covington, 1981;Houston & Holmes, 1975), and our results are consistent with those obtained in research conducted with teachers (e.g., Hinnerich, Höglin, & Johannesson, 2015;Rangvid, 2015;Sprietsma, 2013).…”

Section: Limitations and Conclusionsupporting

confidence: 91%

The function of selection of assessment leads evaluators to artificially create the social class achievement gap.

Autin¹,

Batruch²,

Butera³

2019

Journal of Educational Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To understand the persistent social class achievement gap, researchers have investigated how educational settings affect lower versus higher socioeconomic status (SES) students' performance. We move beyond the question of actual performance to study its assessment by evaluators. We hypothesized that even in the absence of performance differences, assessment's function of selection (i.e., compare, rank, and track students) leads evaluators to create a SES achievement gap. In 2 experiments (N ϭ 196; N ϭ 259), participants had to assess a test supposedly produced by a high-or a low-SES student, and used assessment for selection (i.e., normative grading) or learning (i.e., formative comments). Results showed that evaluators using assessment for selection found more mistakes if the test was attributed to a low-rather than a high-SES student, a difference reduced in the assessment for learning condition. The third and fourth experiments (N ϭ 374; N ϭ 306) directly manipulated the function of assessment to investigate whether the production of the social class achievement gap was facilitated by the function of selection to a greater extent than the educational function. Results of Experiment 3 supported this hypothesis. The effect did not reach significance for Experiment 4, but an internal meta-analysis confirmed that assessment used for selection led evaluators to create a SES achievement gap more than assessment used for learning, thereby contributing to the reproduction of social inequalities. Educational Impact and Implications Statement Evaluators' knowledge about students' social class can bias their assessment, in favor of privileged students. The present research suggests that assessment in itself does not trigger such a bias, nor are teachers biased in themselves; rather it is the function given to assessment that can trigger or prevent discriminatory assessment. This research found that a social class gap in evaluation appears when assessment is used for selective purposes (i.e., gauging merit and sorting students) to a greater extent that when it is used for educational purposes (i.e., fostering learning). The findings indicate that to ensure equality in educational institutions, closer attention should be paid to the role and meaning of assessment.

show abstract

Section: Limitations and Conclusionsupporting

confidence: 91%

The function of selection of assessment leads evaluators to artificially create the social class achievement gap.

Autin¹,

Batruch²,

Butera³

2019

Journal of Educational Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some authors believe so. For instance, Sprietsma (2013) and Rangvid (2015), who documented the existence of an unwarranted lower grading of, respectively, immigrant and lower social class students, interpret this effect as the result of the teachers’ prejudiced expectations based on the students’ background. In the remainder of this section, we present two lines of research that question this view and support the conceptual analysis we propose in this article: The behavior teachers adopt, and the influence they yield, depends on the role they endorse, namely gatekeepers or mentors.…”

Section: Teaching Learning and Levels Of Influencementioning

confidence: 99%

Teaching as Social Influence: Empowering Teachers to Become Agents of Social Change

Butera

Batruch

Autin

et al. 2020

Social Issues Policy Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Teachers carry out a number of roles in the educational system. Their primary role is to help all students develop knowledge and skills, but, most of the time, they take on the role of gatekeepers: They evaluate students and exercise selection on the basis of performance. We analyze the roles of teachers through the lens of the literature on social influence, and put forward the proposal that teaching is a form of social influence. We review existing research on the mechanisms that explain the differential effects teachers may have on students' learning, students' prospects and, therefore, educational justice. We conclude that if teachers endorse the role of mentors-instead of that of gatekeepers-focusing on the development of their students' knowledge, they can promote deep study, long-term learning, and equality of treatment. Such an approach could help design teacher training and school reform so as to maximize the learning potential of all students and empower teachers to become active agents of profound individual and social change.

show abstract

“…implying that characteristics, such as gender and race, significantly affect teacher perceptions of student performance (e.g. Dee 2007, Downey and Pribesh 2004, and Rangvid 2015.…”

Section: The National Testsmentioning

confidence: 99%