Download Teacher Expectations' Impact on Student Performance: Effects and Communication Strategies and more Assignments Literature in PDF only on Docsity!
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT RESEARCH SERIES
Research You Can Use
Close-Up
Expectations and Student Outcomes
November 1989 Kathleen Cotton INTRODUCTION ..."You see, really and truly, apart from the things anyone can pick up (the dressing and the proper way of speaking, and so on), the difference between a lady and a flower girl is not how she behaves, but how she's treated. I shall always be a flower girl to Professor Higgins, because he always treats me as a flower girl, and always will; but I know I can be a lady to you, because you always treat me as a lady, and always will." With this quotation from George Bernard Shaw's play, PYGMALION, Robert Rosenthal and Lenore Jacobson conclude their 1968 publication, PYGMALION IN THE CLASSROOM. Just as the character, Eliza Doolittle, suggests that a person's place in society is largely a matter of how he or she is treated by others, the Rosenthal/Jacobson study concluded that students' intellectual development is largely a response to what teachers expect and how those expectations are communicated. The original Pygmalion study involved giving teachers false information about the learning potential of certain students in grades one through six in a San Francisco elementary school. Teachers were told that these students had been tested and found to be on the brink of a period of rapid intellectual growth; in reality, the students had been selected at random. At the end of the experimental period, some of the targeted students--and particularly those in grades one and two--exhibited performance on IQ tests which was superior to the scores of other students of similar ability and superior to what would have been expected of the target students with no intervention. These results led the researchers to claim that the inflated expectations teachers held for the target students (and, presumably, the teacher behaviors that accompanied those high expectations) actually CAUSED the students to experience accelerated intellectual growth. Few research studies in the field of education have generated as much attention and controversy among educators, researchers, and the general public as Rosenthal and Jacobson's Pygmalion study. Theorists argued about the psychological validity of "expectancy effects." Researchers set up attempts to replicate Pygmalion's findings. And in
the popular press, articles began appearing which used the Pygmalion findings as a springboard for the claim that perhaps "Johnny can't read" because his teachers don't have faith in his abilities and don't encourage him, particularly if he is poor or a member of a minority group. Other articles looked at the positive side, giving teachers and parents the message that they could improve children's school performance dramatically by communicating high expectations to them. In the years since the original Pygmalion study was published, a great many additional studies have been undertaken. Several investigators (Snow 1969; Thorndike 1968; Wineburg 1987) have examined Rosenthal and Jacobson's study and found technical defects serious enough to cast doubt upon the accuracy of its findings. Some replication experiments seemed to confirm the Pygmalion findings, and others failed to do so. Other researchers conducted studies which sought to identify the ways that expectations are communicated to students. Meanwhile, the popular press, for the most part, continued to treat the Pygmalion findings as gospel and sometimes cast aspersions on America's teachers for the failure of some children to learn, claiming that teachers' low expectations were either creating or sustaining the problem. Whether one is inclined to accept or doubt the findings of the Pygmalion study and other research supporting "self-fulfilling prophecy" effects, it is clear that educators and the general public were and are very interested in the power of expectations to affect student outcomes. DEFINITIONS To expect something is to look forward to its probable occurrence or appearance, according to the AMERICAN HERITAGE DICTIONARY OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE. TEACHER EXPECTATIONS refer to inferences that teachers make about the future academic achievement of students (Cooper and Good 1983). SCHOOLWIDE EXPECTATIONS refer to the beliefs held by the staff as a whole about the learning ability of the student body. As originally described by Merton (1948), a SELFFULFILLING PROPHECY occurs when a false definition of a situation evokes a new behavior which makes the originally false conception come true. Thus, the Pygmalion study is seen as a self-fulfilling prophecy effect, because while the imminent intellectual blooming of target students was "false information" given to teachers, believing the information presumably led teachers to act in such a way as to make the false conception a reality. Finally, SUSTAINING EXPECTATION EFFECTS are said to occur when teachers respond on the basis of their existing expectations for students rather than to changes in student performance caused by sources other than the teacher (Cooper and Good 1983). As Good and Brophy (1984) express the difference: Self-fulfilling prophecies are the most dramatic form of teacher expectation effects, because they involve changes in student behavior. Sustaining expectations refer to situations in which teachers fail to see student potential and hence do not respond in a way to encourage some students to fulfill their potential. In summary, self-fulfilling expectations bring about change in student performance, whereas sustaining expectations prevent change." (p. 93)
SETTING GOALS WHICH ARE EXPRESSED AS MINIMALLY ACCEPTABLE
LEVELS OF ACHIEVEMENT rather than using prior achievement data to establish ceiling levels beyond which students would not be expected to progress (Good 1987) DEVELOPING AND APPLYING POLICIES WHICH PROTECT INSTRUCTIONAL TIME, e.g., policies regarding attendance, tardiness, interruptions during basic skills instructional periods, etc. (Murphy, et al., 1982) DEVELOPING POLICIES AND PRACTICES WHICH UNDERSCORE THE IMPORTANCE OF READING, i.e., written policies regarding the amount of time spent on reading instruction daily, use of a single reading series to maintain continuity, frequent free reading periods, homework which emphasizes reading; frequent sharing of student reading progress with parents, and strong instructional leadership (Hallinger and Murphy 1985; Murphy, et al. 1982) ESTABLISHING POLICIES WHICH EMPHASIZE THE IMPORTANCE OF ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT TO STUDENTS, e.g., minimally acceptable levels of achievement to qualify for participation in extracurricular activities, regular notification to parents when academic expectations aren't being met, etc. (Murphy and Hallinger 1985) Having STAFF MEMBERS WHO HOLD HIGH EXPECTATIONS FOR THEMSELVES as leaders and teachers, taking responsibility for student performance (Brookover and Lezotte 1979; Edmonds 1979; Murphy and Hallinger, 1985; Murphy, et al. 1982) Using SLOGANS WHICH COMMUNICATE HIGH EXPECTATIONS, e.g., "academics plus," "the spirit of our school," etc. (Newberg and Glatthorn 1982) Establishing a POSITIVE LEARNING CLIMATE, i.e., the appearance of the physical plant and the sense of order and discipline that pervades both noninstructional and instructional areas (Edmonds, 1979; Newberg and Glatthorn 1982; Murphy, et al., 1982) "INSISTENT COACHING" of students who are experiencing learning difficulty (Good 1987; Taylor 1986-87) In addition, Murphy, et al. (1982) state that Perhaps the most important thing schools can do to promote high expectations is to frame school purpose policies in terms of one or two academic goals, which can in turn provide the framework for all other school activity (p.24). TEACHER EXPECTATIONS Teacher expectations are, of course, a component of schoolwide expectations. In addition, researchers have conducted numerous detailed examinations of the ways teacher expectations are communicated to students in classroom settings and how these messages influence student outcomes. The most important finding from this research is that TEACHER EXPECTATIONS CAN AND DO AFFECT STUDENTS' ACHIEVEMENT AND ATTITUDES. Among the research materials supporting this paper, all that address this topic found relationships between expectations and student outcomes. How do teacher expectations affect student outcomes? Most researchers accept Good and Brophy's (1980) description of the process:
- Early in the school year, teachers form differential expectations for student behavior and achievement.
- Consistent with these differential expectations, teachers behave differently toward various students.
- This treatment tells students something about how they are expected to behave in the classroom and perform on academic tasks.
- If the teacher treatment is consistent over time and if students do not actively resist or change it, it will likely affect their self-concepts, achievement motivation, levels of aspiration, classroom conduct, and interactions with the teacher.
- These effects generally will complement and reinforce the teacher's expectations, so that students will come to conform to these expectations more than they might have otherwise.
- Ultimately, this will affect student achievement and other outcomes. High- expectation students will be led to achieve at or near their potential, but lowexpectation students will not gain as much as they could have gained if taught differently (Restated in Good 1987, p. 33). While this is a useful model for describing the way that expectations can affect student outcomes, researchers offer several cautions about its usefulness for describing what occurs in classrooms. For one thing, they point out that full-blown SELF-FULFILLING PROPHECY EFFECTS can occur only when all the elements in the model are present. While this can and sometimes does occur, most researchers have concluded that teacher expectations are not generally formed on the basis of "false conceptions" at all. Rather, they are based on the best information available about the students (Brophy 1983; Brophy and Good 1970; Clifton 1981; Cooper 1983, 1984; Good 1987, 1982; Good and Brophy, 1984; Meyer 1985; Raudenbush 1984; and Wineburg 1987). However, even though the initial expectations formed by teachers may be realistic and appropriate, researchers have found that SUSTAINING EXPECTATION EFFECTS can occur and can also limit students' learning and selfconcept development. As noted by Good (1987): For sustaining expectations to occur, it is only necessary that teachers engage in behaviors that maintain students' and teachers' previously formed low expectations (e.g., by giving low-expectation students only drill work, easy questions, etc.) (p. 34). THE EXTENT AND STRENGTH OF DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT How widespread is the practice of teachers' communicating differential expectations to students they perceive as having greater or lesser learning potential? While some researchers have concluded that differential treatment is very widespread and very damaging to those students perceived as low potential, most do not agree. Instead, their work has led them to conclude that the majority of teachers both form initial expectations on the basis of viable information and are able to adjust their expectations and instructional approaches as changes in students' performance occur (Brophy 1983; Brophy and Good 1970, 1976; Cooper and Good 1983; Cooper and Tom 1984; Good 1982, 1987; Meyer 1985; Raudenbush 1984; and Wineburg 1987). This is particularly true with experienced
viewed as less capable than Anglo students. TYPE OF SCHOOL. Students from either inner city schools or rural schools are sometimes presumed to be less capable than students from suburban schools. APPEARANCE. The expense or style of students' clothes and students' grooming habits can influence teachers' expectations. ORAL LANGUAGE PATTERNS. The presence of any nonstandard English speaking pattern can sometimes lead teachers to hold lower expectations. MESSINESS/DISORGANIZATION. Students whose work areas or assignments are messy are sometimes perceived as having lower ability. READINESS. Immaturity or lack of experience may be confused with learning ability, leading to inappropriately low expectations. HALO EFFECT. Some teachers generalize from one characteristic a student may have, thereby making unfounded assumptions about the student's overall ability or behavior. SEATING POSITION. If students seat themselves at the sides or back of the classroom, some teachers perceive this as a sign of lower learning motivation and/or ability and treat students accordingly. NEGATIVE COMMENTS ABOUT STUDENTS. Teachers' expectations are sometimes influenced by the negative comments of other staff members. OUTDATED THEORIES. Educational theories which stress the limitations of learners can lead to lowered expectations. TRACKING OR LONG-TERM ABILITY GROUPS. Placement in "low" tracks or groups can cause students to be viewed as having less learning potential than they actually have. According to research, those teachers who hold low expectations for students based on factors such as those listed above are rarely acting out of malice; indeed, they are often not even aware that their low expectations have developed based on specious reasoning. Thus, efforts aimed at helping teachers to avoid harmful stereotyping of students often begin with activities designed to raise teachers' awareness of their unconscious biases. Researchers and reviewers also note that putting too much faith in APPROPRIATE sources of information, such as test scores and cumulative folder information, can lead to unsuitable expectations and treatments. These writers warn that these data should not be viewed as the final truth about students' ability, but rather as guides for INITIAL placement and instructional decisions. HOW DIFFERENTIAL EXPECTATIONS ARE COMMUNICATED TO STUDENTS Of course, merely HOLDING certain expectations for students has no magical power to affect their performance or attitudes. Rather, it is the translation of these expectations into BEHAVIOR that influences outcomes. It is important to keep in mind that most teachers, as noted above, do NOT translate differential expectations into behaviors that inhibit students' academic growth. Instead, they seek and find ways to help each student reach his or her learning potential. Unfortunately, however, researchers have found that some teachers do interact with students for whom they hold low expectations in such a way as to limit their development. The types of
differential treatment listed below are identified in the work of Brookover, et al. (1982); Brophy (1983); Brophy and Evertson (1976); Brophy and Good (1970); Cooper and Good (1983); Cooper and Tom (1984); Cotton (1989); Good (1987, 1982); Good, et al. (1980); Good and Brophy (1984): Giving low-expectation students fewer opportunities than high-expectation students to learn new material Waiting less time for low-expectation students to answer during class recitations than is given to highexpectation students Giving low-expectation students answers or calling on someone else rather than trying to improve their responses by giving clues or repeating or rephrasing questions, as they do with high-expectation students Giving low-expectation students inappropriate reinforcement, e.g., giving reinforcement which is not contingent on performance Criticizing low-expectation students for failure more often and more severely than high-expectation students and praising them less frequently for success Failing to give feedback to the public responses of low-expectation students Paying less attention to low-expectation students than high-expectation students, including calling on low-expectation students less often during recitations Seating low-expectation students farther from the teacher than high-expectation students Interacting with low-expectation students more privately than publicly and structuring their activities much more closely Conducting differential administration or grading of tests or assignments, in which high-expectation students--but not low-expectation students--are given the benefit of the doubt in borderline cases Conducting less friendly and responsive interactions with low-expectation students than high-expectation students, including less smiling, positive head nodding, forward leaning, eye contact, etc. Giving briefer and less informative feedback to the questions of low-expectation students than those of high-expectation students Asking high-expectation students more stimulating, higher cognitive questions than low-expectation students Making less frequent use of effective but timeconsuming instructional methods with low-expectation students than with high-expectation students, especially when time is limited. These kinds of differential treatment have been noted in the behavior of some teachers toward different INDIVIDUALS in classrooms, but they are also observed by researchers looking at teachers' behavior toward different ability GROUPS in classrooms and in tracked CLASSROOMS. Students in low groups and tracks have been found to get less exciting instruction, less emphasis upon meaning and conceptualization, and more rote drill and practice activities than those in high reading groups and tracks (Brophy 1983; Cooper and Tom 1984; Good 1987; and Good and Brophy 1984). Researchers also note that the instructional environment in heterogeneous groups and classes is similar to that in high groups and tracks--more demanding, more opportunities to learn, and a warmer socioemotional climate. As with the FORMATION of expectations based on inappropriate factors, the COMMUNICATION of differential expectations is often unconscious on the part of teachers. Or, in cases where teachers are aware that they are practicing differential
ways are generally not aware of their harmful thinking and behaviors. When teachers engage in differential treatment of high- and low-expectation students, students are aware of these differences. Low-expectation students have better attitudes in classrooms where differential treatment is low than in classrooms where it is high. In the hands of some teachers, low groups and low tracks are subject to the same kinds of limiting treatment as are individual low-expectation students-- with the same negative effects. The negative effects of differential teacher treatment on low-expectation students may be direct (less exposure to learning material) or indirect (treating students in ways that erode their learning motivation and sense of self-efficacy). Training can enable school staff members to become aware of their unconscious biases and differential treatment of students, and help them to make positive changes in their thinking and behavior. Given these findings, what can be done to improve the ways teachers form expectations and communicate them, especially to students they perceive as having limited potential? The following recommendations are drawn from the work of Brophy (1983), Cooper and Tom (1984), Cotton (1989), Good and Brophy (1984), Marshall and Weinstein (1984), Patriarca (1986), and Woolfolk (1985): Avoid unreliable sources of information about students' learning potential, e.g., social stereotypes, the biases of other teachers, etc. Set goals (for individuals, groups, classrooms, and whole schools) in terms of floors (minimally acceptable standards), not ceilings; communicate to students that they have the ability to meet those standards. Use heterogeneous grouping and cooperative learning activities whenever possible; these approaches capitalize on students' strengths and take the focus off weaknesses. Develop task structures in which students work on different tasks, on tasks that can be pursued in different ways, and on tasks that have no particular right answer. This will minimize harmful comparisons. Emphasize that different students are good at different things and let students see that this is true by having them observe one another's products, performances, etc. Concentrate on extending warmth, friendliness, and encouragement to all students. Monitor student progress closely so as to keep expectations of individuals current. Give all students generous amounts of wait-time to formulate their answers during recitations; this will increase participation and improve the quality of responses. In giving students feedback, stress continuous progress relative to previous levels of mastery, rather than comparisons with statistical norms or other individuals. In giving students feedback, focus on giving useful information, not just evaluation of success or failure. When students do not understand an explanation or demonstration, diagnose the learning difficulty and follow through by breaking down the task or reteach it in a different way, rather than merely repeating the same instruction or giving up. In general, think in terms of stretching the students' minds by stimulating them and encouraging them to achieve as much as they can, not in terms of "protecting" them from failure or embarrassment. The research of Marshall and Weinstein (1984) and other investigators indicates that teachers can be trained to view intelligence as a multi-faceted and continuously changing quality and to move away from holding and communicating unfounded or rigidly
constrained expectations to their students. Given the power of teacher expectations to influence students' learning and their feelings about themselves, providing such teacher training is a good--perhaps essential-- investment in our educational system. KEY REFERENCES Baksh, I.J., and Martin, W.B.W. "Teacher Expectation and the Student Perspective." THE CLEARING HOUSE 57 (1984): 341-343. Presents the results of a large-scale survey of high school students regarding their response to having teachers who hold high academic expectations for them. A majority of students reacted negatively, believing that their teachers' expectations were extreme or unfair. Bhusan, V. RELATIONSHIP OF TEACHER ATTITUDE TO THE ENVIRONMENT OF HIS/HER CLASS. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL, March-April, 1985. (ED 260 118). Compares the achievement levels and attitudes of secondary students whose teachers rated high on behaviors such as warmth, high expectations, trust, openness, and flexibility with the achievement and attitudes of students whose teachers were rated as "authoritarian, pessimistic, repressing, and reproachful." Classrooms of this latter group of teachers were characterized by friction, favoritism, dissatisfaction, and lower achievement levels. Brattesani, K.A.; Weinstein, R.S.; and Marshall, H.H. "Student Perceptions of Differential Teacher Treatment as Moderators of Teacher Expectation Effects." JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY 76 (1984): 236-247. Presents the results of two studies which examined the relationships among teacher expectations, students' perceptions of differential treatment accorded to students for whom teachers hold different expectations, student perceptions of teachers' treatment of them personally, and student achievement levels. Results indicate that differential teacher treatment emanating from different expectations sustains and even increases differences in student achievement. Brookover, W.B.; Beady, C.; Flood, P.; Schweitzer, J.; and Wisenbaker, J. SCHOOL SOCIAL SYSTEMS AND STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT: SCHOOLS CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE. New York: Bergin, 1979. Presents the results of a large-scale study of fourth and fifth graders, their teachers, and their principals in approximately 170 schools in the state of Michigan. A variety of social structure and school climate variables were examined in relation to student outcomes. , and Lezotte, L.W. CHANGES IN SCHOOL CHARACTERISTICS COINCIDENT WITH CHANGES IN STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT. Occasional Paper No. 17. East Lansing, MI: Institute for Research on Teaching, Michigan State University, 1979. (ED 181 005). Presents the results of an in-depth analysis of elementary schools, six of which were characterized by improving student achievement, and two of which
, and Tom, D.Y.H. "Teacher Expectation Research: A Review with Implications for Classroom Instruction." THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL JOURNAL 85 (1984): 77-89. Reviews research on the effects of teacher expectations on student achievement and attitudes. Outlines research findings on the behaviors through which expectations are communicated. Offers a model of the ways expectations influence outcomes, and provides recommendations for minimizing the negative effects of expressing low expectations. ; Findley, M.; and Good, T. "Relations Between Student Achievement and Various Indexes of Teacher Expectations." JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY 74 (1982), 577-579. Examines the effect of teacher expectations on student reading achievement. Sixth graders in thirteen classes and their teachers participated. Changes in student achievement levels were affected by teachers' perceptions of student ability. Cotton, K. CLASSROOM QUESTIONING. CLOSE-UP #5. Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory, 1989. Synthesizes findings from 37 studies of the relationship between teachers' questioning behaviors and student achievement and other outcomes. Supports the use of longer wait-times during questioning sessions and increases in higher cognitive questions. Crohn, L. TOWARD EXCELLENCE: STUDENT AND TEACHER BEHAVIORS AS PREDICTORS OF SCHOOL SUCCESS. Research Summary Report. Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory, 1983. (ED 242 704). Provides research findings and offers recommendations regarding the effects of teacher and student attitudes and behaviors. Cites research to the effect that teacher expectations are often based on matters unrelated to student ability and that the communication of high or low expectations profoundly affects student performance. Dusek, J.B., (Ed.). TEACHER EXPECTANCIES. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, 1985. Presents a series of articles on the subject of teacher expectancies, including (1) historical trends and methodological concerns, (2) theoretical formulations, (3) individual differences and teacher expectancies, (4) communicating and receiving expectancies, and (5) summary and implications. Edmonds, R. "Effective Schools for the Urban Poor." EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP 37 (1979), 15-18. Reviews research on school factors which increase the achievement levels and enhance the school attitudes of poor, inner-city children. Identifies high expectations as a critical component of effective schooling.
Feldman, R.S., and Theiss, A.J. "The Teacher and Student as Pygmalions: Joint Effects of Teacher and Student Expectations." JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY 74 (1982): 217-223. Examines the reciprocal effects of teacher and student expectations on performance and attitudes. This non-naturalistic study involved 144 female college students, some of whom were given "teacher" tasks and some of whom were given "student" tasks. Participants were given preconceptions about their "teacher" or "student." The major findings were that teacher expectations did influence student achievement and that preconceptions influenced both teacher and student attitudes. Gaddy, G.D. "High School Order and Academic Achievement." AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EDUCATION 96 (1988): 496-518. Reviews several major studies on school effectiveness to clarify the relationship between discipline/order and achievement. One conclusion is that holding high learning expectations for students is an essential part of an effective school climate. Good, T.L. "Two Decades of Research on Teacher Expectations: Findings and Future Directions." JOURNAL OF TEACHER EDUCATION 38 (1987): 32-47. Summarizes research findings regarding the effects of teacher expectations on student achievement and attitudes. Discusses self-fulfilling prophecy effects, sustaining expectations effects, and the ways teacher expectations impact individual students, groups within classrooms, whole classrooms, and entire schools.
. "How Teachers' Expectations Affect Results." AMERICAN EDUCATION 18 (1982): 25-
- Summarizes research conducted by the author and Jere Brophy on the effects of teachers' expectations on student attitudes and achievement. Also discusses the expectations communication model used to conduct the research. ; Cooper, H.; and Blakey, S. "Classroom Interaction as a Function of Teacher Expectations, Student Sex, and Time of Year." JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY 72 (1980): 378-385. Examines the effects of teacher expectations and student sex on teachers' treatment of students and seeks to identify changes in differential treatment over time. Twelve students in third, fourth, and fifth grade classes participated. Teachers' behaviors favored high-ability students in ways congruent with the findings of most other research studies in this area. , and Brophy, J.E. "Teacher Expectations." Chapter 4 in LOOKING IN CLASSROOMS. New York: Harper & Row, 1984, 93-121. Offers research evidence regarding the ways that teacher expectations are formed, how they are communicated to students, and how they influence student self-perceptions and achievement. Also provides recommendations for
classroom practices which de-emphasize comparisons among students. Meyer, W.J. "Summary, Integration, and Prospective." Chapter 14 in Dusek, J.B. (Ed.). TEACHER EXPECTANCIES. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, 1985, 353-371. Reviews major points of authors represented in this collection of writings on teacher expectations and offers recommendations for both researchers and theoreticians working in this area. Miskel, C., and Bloom, S. EXPECTANCY CLIMATE AND SCHOOL EFFECTIVENESS. Lawrence, KS: Learning Disabilities Institute, 1982. (ED 214 246). Examines the relationship of "expectancy climate"-- what staff expect of themselves and their students--and the school effectiveness indicators of adaptability, perceived goal attainment, teacher job satisfaction, and student attitudes. Data collected from teachers and students in 89 Kansas schools indicated that all four variables are related to expectancy climate. Murphy, J., and Hallinger, P. "Effective High Schools- -What Are the Common Characteristics ?" NASSP BULLETIN 69 (1985), 18-22. Draws from data collected during a nationwide study of effective secondary schools to identify the 18 most effective high schools in California and the characteristics that make them effective. The presence of high expectations for student achievement and behavior was found to be a critical variable in these effective schools. ; Weil, M.; Hallinger, P.; and Mitman, A. "Academic Press: Translating High Expectations into School Policies and Classroom Practices." EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP 40 (1982): 22-26. Provides an overview of research on effective school and classroom practices and offers research-based guidelines for communicating high learning expectations to students through schoolwide policies and classroom practices. Newberg, N.A., and Glatthorn, A.A. INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP: FOUR ETHNOGRAPHIC STUDIES ON JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL PRINCIPALS. Executive Summary. Philadelphia, PA: Pennsylvania University, 1982. (ED 236 809). Reports the results of a study of the behaviors of principals in four unusually successful inner-city junior high schools. Close attention to instructional goals, use of meaningful slogans, an orderly learning environment, and attention to the curriculum were commonalities noted among these successful principals. Patriarca, L.A., and Kragt, D.M. "Teacher Expectations and Student Achievement: The Ghost of Christmas Future." CURRICULUM REVIEW 25 (1986): 48-50. Presents study results, discusses the teacher expectation research, and offers guidelines to help teachers minimize self-fulfilling prophecy effects-- especially on low-track students in mathematics.
Raudenbush, S.W. "Magnitude of Teacher Expectancy Effects on Pupil IQ as a Function of the Credibility of Expectancy Induction: A Synthesis of Findings From 18 Experiments." JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY 76 (1984): 85-97. Applies the technique of meta-analysis to 18 studies of the effect of teacher expectations on student IQ scores. In general, expectancy effects on IQ were either nonexistent or nonsignificant. The evidence also supported the hypothesis that the better the teachers know their pupils at the time of expectancy induction, the smaller the treatment effect. Younger children were more susceptible to expectancy effects than older children. Rosenthal, R. "Pygmalion Effects: Existence, Magnitude, and Social Importance." EDUCATIONAL RESEARCHER 16 (1987): 37-40. Replies to Wineburg's essay in this same issue (see below), and claims that meta-analytic work conducted with the teacher expectations research since the original Pygmalion study demonstrates that "there is a phenomenon to be explained...[and] that the phenomenon is nontrivial in magnitude." , and Jacobson, L. PYGMALION IN THE CLASSROOM: TEACHER EXPECTATION AND PUPILS' INTELLECTUAL DEVELOPMENT. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1968. Describes a research study in which efforts were made to manipulate teacher expectations for student achievement to see if these expectations would be fulfilled. First through sixth graders in one school participated. Some of the children whose teachers were told they had exceptional abilities, outperformed their peers on IQ measures (particularly in grades one and two). Smith, M.L. "Teacher Expectations." EVALUATION IN EDUCATION 4 (1980): 53-55. Presents the results of a meta-analysis of 47 studies on the effects of teacher expectations on student achievement. Teacher behavior was found to vary in relation to teacher expectations "to a modest degree," and teacher expectations had a stronger effect on achievement than on IQ. Snow, R.E. "Unfinished Pygmalion." CONTEMPORARY PSYCHOLOGY 14 (1969): 197-200. Critiques the 1968 Rosenthal and Jacobson publication, PYGMALION IN THE CLASSROOM, calling attention to technical flaws in the design of the Pygmalion research. Stockard, J., and Mayberry, M. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SCHOOL ENVIRONMENTS AND STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT: A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE. Eugene, OR: Division of Educational Policy and Management, College of Education, University of Oregon, 1986. Reviews research on the effects of school and community factors on student achievement and attitudes. Schoolwide and classroom expectations for high student achievement and positive social behavior were among the strongest predictors of these outcomes.
OTHER REFERENCES
Arganbright, J.L. "Teacher Expectations--A Critical Factor for Student Achievement." NAASP BULLETIN 67 (1983): 93-95. Draws from the research on teacher expectations to discuss factors which influence teachers' development of achievement and behavioral expectations for their students. Arnold, G.H. AN INTERPRETIVE ANALYSIS OF TEACHER EXPECTATIONS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION. No publisher indicated, 1985. (ED 266 877). Investigates the ways that teachers' expectations develop, the views teachers hold about "good" and "bad" students, the ways teacher expectations influence the lives of the children they teach, and the ways teachers notions about the "model" student affect the development and implementation of the curriculum. Bracey, G.W. "Pygmalion: Yes or No?" PHI DELTA KAPPAN 69 (1988): 686-687. Reviews a 1987 EDUCATIONAL RESEARCHER article by Samuel Wineburg challenging the reality of the educational self-fulfilling prophecy. Carr, M., and Kurtz, B.E. TEACHERS' PERCEPTIONS OF STUDENTS' METACOGNITION, ATTRIBUTIONS, AND SELFCONCEPT. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA,
Seeks to determine the accuracy and the predictors of teachers' evaluations of their students in the areas of metacognition and motivation. Fifty-four third graders and their teachers participated. Teachers were found to attribute better metacognition, higher self-concept, and stronger effort to high achievers, even when these attributions were unfounded. Cecil, N.L. "Black Dialect and Academic Success: A Study of Teacher Expectations." READING IMPROVEMENT 25 (1988): 34-38. Investigates the effects on teacher expectations produced by teachers listening to tapes of second graders speaking standard English and those speaking black dialect. Though all children had similar IQ test scores, teachers had higher expectations for those speaking standard English. Darley, J.M., and Fazio, R.H. "Expectancy Confirmation Processes Arising in the Social Interaction Sequence." AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGIST 35 (1980), 867-881. Presents a model of the process by which selffulfilling prophecy effects occur and offers recommendations for further research on this topic. Dusek, J.B., and Joseph, G. "The Bases of Teacher Expectancies: A Meta-Analysis." JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY 75 (1983): 327-346.
Presents results of a meta-analysis of 77 studies of the factors on which teacher expectations of student achievement and behavior are based. Factors found to influence teacher expectations included attractiveness, student classroom conduct, cumulative folder information, race, and social class. Unrelated factors included gender and one- or two-parent family structure. Farley, J.R. "Raising Student Achievement Through the Affective Domain." EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP 39 (1982): 502-503. Provides a brief overview of the Teacher Expectations and Student Achievement (TESA) program developed by the Los Angeles County Schools in 1971. Suggestions are offered to staff developers for ways to make the TESA training maximally interesting and meaningful to participating teachers. Good, T.L., and Weinstein, R.S. "Teacher Expectations: A Framework for Exploring Classrooms." Chapter 6 in Zumwalt, K.K. (Ed.). IMPROVING TEACHING: 1986 ASCD YEARBOOK. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 1986, 63-85. Describes observational studies of the ways that teachers communicate expectations in classrooms. Identifies needs for improvement in the classrooms observed and suggests ways that coaches might work with the teachers in question to improve their performance. Grant, L., and Rothenberg, J. "The Social Enhancement of Ability Differences: Teacher- Student Interactions in First- and Second-Grade Reading Groups." THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL JOURNAL 87 (1986): 29-49. Presents the results of a study of ability grouping strategies and effects in eight elementary classrooms. Concludes that ability grouping for reading is both a cause and an effect of teacher expectations, and that this expression of expectations is academically and socially damaging to students placed in "low" groups. Grayson, D.A. EVALUATING THE IMPACT OF THE GENDER EXPECTATIONS AND STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT (GESA) PROGRAM. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC, April 1987. (ED 283 881). Describes the GESA program, which was developed to reduce the disparity in the treatment received by boys and girls in the classroom and to improve instructional materials and the learning environment for all children. Discusses program implementation and a validation study conducted in California. Guskey, T.R. "The Effects of Change in Instructional Effectiveness on the Relationship of Teacher Expectations and Student Achievement." JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH 75 (1982): 345-349. Examines the effects of training to improve instructional effectiveness on the relationship between teacher expectations and student outcomes. The correlations between teachers' initial expectations for students' achievement and students' actual outcomes were lower for control teachers.
