Influences

"The people with whom individuals compare themselves influence how they judge their ability." (Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28, 121.)

Types of Influences

Socioeconomic Status

Families of a low socioeconomic status often hold higher educational expectations in their children. This can lead to children having higher academic efficay, aspiration, low problem behavior, and academic achievement. (Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G. V., & Pastorelli, C. (1996). Multifaceted impact of self-efficacy beliefs on academic functioning. Child Development, 67,1213.)

Race and Ethnicity

Teachers often underestimate African American students due to a belief that they produce lower achievement, leading to them being ignored in the classroom. (Reyna, C. (2000). Lazy, dumb, or industrious: When stereotypes convey attribution information in the classroom. Educational Psychology Review, 12, 86.)

Gender

Women, especially in more "masculine" subjects like math or science, receive less communication or praise from their teachers. (Reyna, C. (2000). Lazy, dumb, or industrious: When stereotypes convey attribution information in the classroom. Educational Psychology Review, 12, 86.)

Past Experience

When students have succeeded at something before, they are more likely to believe they can succeed again. However, repeated failure can lower their confidence.

Observing Others

Seeing someone else succeed can make students think, "if they can do it, maybe I can do it too."

Encouragement from Others

Teachers, parents, and classmates can encourage students and help them believe they are capable of succeeding

The expectations a student holds for themselves often come from social expectations. This can be a result of stereotyping, where a teacher may have a higher or lower expectation of a student based on their race, gender, or socioeconomic status. Or it could come from the student's observations, their experiences, and even the treatment they receive from those in their lives. This graphic displays the different paths of influence for a student.

*Note: I can't make this photo any more clear, this is what it looks like in the article. I am sorry.

(Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G. V., & Pastorelli, C. (1996). Multifaceted impact of self-efficacy beliefs on academic functioning. Child Development, 67,1206-1222.)

Consequences

Negative stereotyping can lead to fewer opportunities being granted to members of those groups. For example, the system automatically assumes that Black and Mexican students underperform, but in reality this is just because these students are disproportionately placed into "ghetto schools."
Much like the dogs discussed in Seligman's theory, many students who fail without the resources to succeed over and over again begin to accept that failure is part of them. They internalize failure as a part of them rather than something they can change and overcome.
One study cited by Christine Reyna "indicated that participants were more likely to attribute African American's scholastic success (a stereotype-inconsistent event) to unstable causes like effort, and to attribute poor scholastic performance (stereotype-consistent event) to stable causes like low ability. The opposite pattern was found for whites, whose academic success is stereotype-consistent: White's success was attributed to high ability (stable) and their poor performance to low effort (an unstable cause)." This outcome clearly illustrates the principle of negative and positive attributions being tied to stereotypes about physical traits, in this case race.
The presence of stereotypes in educational settings strips students from their individuality and personal circumstances, whether in success or failure.
This pattern of stereotypes affects educators and administrators as well. It can cause them to act according to the stereotype of a group of which a student is a member, rather than the actual student at hand.
Stereotypes deeply influence the way students regard themselves, and internal attributions about inherent ability based on race, gender, socioeconomic status, or any other generalized criteria. These generalizations can either suppress a student's belief in themselves if negative, or set them up for an internal struggle in the future if initially positive. (Reyna, C. (2000). Lazy, dumb, or industrious: When stereotypes convey attribution information in the classroom. Educational Psychology Review, 12, 94-100.)

(Reyna, C. (2000). Lazy, dumb, or industrious: When stereotypes convey attribution information in the classroom. Educational Psychology Review, 12, 89.)

Page updated

Google Sites

Report abuse