The Threat is Real...But there is Hope! Blog Post #3

Chloe Kenworthy
Bartley Meinke


How does stereotype threat happen? How does the environment influence feelings of stereotype threat? Is the threat real?

Stereotype threat is a concept explored by Dr. Claude M. Steele. It is the idea that people are influenced in certain situations by a societal stigma corresponding to their identity. Dr. Steele states researched this concept by testing white and black students some at the collegiate level and some form an inner city high school in Los Angeles administering a test and changing the statement regarding the reason for administration. Dr. Steele and his colleagues were sure to test a wide range of students, in another study making sure to test this theory in regards to women and mathematics.

Throughout the experiment the students were asked to take a test. Prior to the test taking, the researchers stated different reasons for which the test was being administered. The results varied depending on the group and the statement. In conclusion, Steele and his colleagues were able to state that, “These people know their group identity. They know how their society views it. They know they are doing something for which that view is relevant. They know, at some level, that they are in a predicament: their performance could confirm a bad view of their group and of themselves, as members of the group” (p.59). This is essentially what stereotype threat is. A person's performance can be affected by how they feel they or their group are perceived. This adds a level of pressure to the situation. Something that resonated with me while reading these chapters was a statement made on page 54, Steele states that, 

“They were taking this tests, and others like it, under the weight of history”. This is a heavy weight to bear each time you sit down to be assessed on your intellectual ability.  (This video, embedded below, shares a similar experiment discussed briefly in chapter one that displays similar results (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGEUVM6QuMg). I believe that the research speaks for itself to the matter of if stereotype threat is real. In my opinion it absolutely is real. I know at times I have felt a similar pressure, not knowing what it was or how to describe it, but it is somehow there. Steele states that, “...our research was revealing a profound importance of social identity: that the contingencies that go with them in specific places at specific times, while often subtle enough to be beneath our awareness, can nonetheless significantly affect things as important as our intellectual functioning” (p.61). The fact of the matter is that society and the environment around us places these stereotypes on specific groups and it results in a lack of adequate performance.

The threat is very real.  As mentioned above, Steele has shown empirically that stereotype threat affects the performance of a population.  He showed it with white Princeton students during a golf test, black students in academic settings, women in math, and the list goes on.  In all situations Steele was able to prove that “the weight of history” can negatively affect a group’s performance on a number of tasks when the individual fears that their performance can reinforce a held stereotype about a group they identify with.  These threats could also affect high ability and gifted students.  But Steele also shows us in the latter part of Whistling Vivaldi that all is not lost.  He presents very real methods and strategies that we can employ to minimize the negative effects of this threat.  As teachers, Steele gives two very practical strategies that we may be able to use to minimize this threat.

To present the first strategy, Steele recounts an experience presented by Tom Ostrom at Stanford University.  The experiment involved changing the way feedback was given to a group of black and white students.  The researchers had both groups of students write essays about their favorite professors, and then the researchers gave feedback in various ways.  Researchers found that two ways of giving feedback proved generally ineffective for black students: it didn’t work to try to be neutral when giving feedback, and it didn’t work to begin each critique with a positive statement.  Ostrom found that black students generally did not trust this type of feedback, fearing that racial bias by white professors might be incorporated into the feedback.  Ostrom saw that these kinds of feedback did not motivate students to make improvements.  But what did seem to be effective was to explain that he had used very high standards when evaluating the students’ work to be published in a teaching magazine, and to express the belief that all of the students were capable of meeting those high standards.  

How could this type of feedback be so effective?  Steele explains “it told them they weren’t being seen in terms of the bad stereotype about their group’s intellectual abilities, since the feedback giver used high intellectual standards and believed they could meet them.  They could feel less jeopardy.  The motivation they had always had was released” (163).   As a practical matter for us as teachers, why would we not want to use this strategy of feedback?  We should use high standards, not only for our gifted students, but for all students, and we should encourage students and let them know that they are all capable of meeting those high standards, and that we are there to help each and every student succeed.

Steele further presents a strategy of developing a sense of belonging among minority and underrepresented students by fostering a narrative of belonging among students.  Greg Walton developed an experience in which black students where presented the results of survey that showed students in their shoes had experienced similar hardships as freshman, but that those fears diminished and that sense of belonging developed as they continued their studies at the university and made use of the resources and advantages that the school had to offer them.  The narrative also focused on the friendships they had made and relationships they had developed.  Steele tells us “Helping to shape the narratives that stereotyped students use to interpret their experience in a school may be a ‘high leverage’ strategy of intervening” (166).  Once again, as teachers, not only is this a practical strategy, but it should be one that we are implementing from the beginning of every school year, for every class.  We should foster a sense of belonging, and let students know that others have been in their shoes, and that success is possible.  We should present students with the knowledge about resources and supports that are available to them, and show them that these resources have worked for other students in the past.  So by simply creating a caring and safe learning environment, one in which we both ask students to meet high standards while encouraging them and letting them know that they possess the ability to meet these standards, and by creating a narrative of nurture and belonging in our class, we may be able to minimize the effects of this very real threat.