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

To understand the persistent social class achievement gap, researchers have investigated how educational settings affect lower vs. higher socio-economic 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 two experiments (N = 196; N = 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 = 374; N = 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

Belief in School Meritocracy and the Legitimization of Social and Income Inequality

Educational institutions are imbued with an institutional meritocratic discourse: only merit counts for academic success. In this article, we study whether this institutional belief has an impact beyond its primary function of encouraging students to study. We propose that belief in school meritocracy has broader societal impact by legitimizing the social class hierarchy it produces and encouraging the maintenance of inequalities. The results of four studies (one correlational study, Ntotal = 198; one experiment, Ntotal = 198; and two international data surveys, Ntotal = 88,421 in 40+countries) indicate that belief in school meritocracy reduces the perceived unfairness of social class inequality in society, support for affirmative action policies at university and support for policies aimed at reducing income inequality. Together, these studies show that the belief that schools are meritocratic carries consequences beyond the school context as it is associated with attitudes that maintain social class and economic inequality

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

International audienceTeachers 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

School Selection and the Social Class Divide: How Tracking Contributes to the Reproduction of Inequalities

International audienceSelection practices in education, such as tracking, may represent a structural obstacle that contributes to the social class achievement gap. We hypothesized that school’s function of selection leads evaluators to reproduce social inequalities in tracking decisions, even when performance is equal. In two studies, participants (students playing the role of teachers, N = 99, or preservice and in-service teachers, N = 70) decided which school track was suitable for a pupil whose socioeconomic status (SES) was manipulated. Although pupils’ achievement was identical, participants considered a lower track more suitable for lower SES than higher SES pupils, and the higher track more suitable for higher SES than lower SES pupils. A third study (N = 160) revealed that when the selection function of school was salient, rather than its educational function, the gap in tracking between social classes was larger. The selection function of tracking appears to encourage evaluators to artificially create social class inequalities

Après la Note : Effets Psychosociaux de L'Evaluation Normative

L’évaluation n’est pas un exercice neutre qui consiste à quantifier les mérites de la production d’un élève : selon le type d’évaluation utilisée (p.ex., normative ou formative) et selon la fonction qu’on lui attribue (sélectionner ou former), les élèves se sentent plus ou moins menacés, et développent des représentations différentes de leur autonomie et de leurs compétences sociales. Ceci a un impact sur leur apprentissage et sur l’égalité de chances. Le présent chapitre passe en revue un programme de recherche qui étudie la menace impliquée dans l’évaluation normative et ses conséquences en termes d’autonomie, compétences sociales et inégalité de traitement des élèves

Belief in school meritocracy and the legitimization of social and income inequality

Published online: 17 August 2022Educational institutions are imbued with an institutional meritocratic discourse: only merit counts for academic success. In this article, we study whether this institutional belief has an impact beyond its primary function of encouraging students to study. We propose that belief in school meritocracy has broader societal impact by legitimizing the social class hierarchy it produces and encouraging the maintenance of inequalities. The results of four studies (one correlational study, Ntotal = 198; one experiment, Ntotal = 198; and two international data surveys, Ntotal = 88,421 in 40+countries) indicate that belief in school meritocracy reduces the perceived unfairness of social class inequality in society, support for affirmative action policies at university and support for policies aimed at reducing income inequality. Together, these studies show that the belief that schools are meritocratic carries consequences beyond the school context as it is associated with attitudes that maintain social class and economic inequality

Revisiting the Effects of Gender Diversity in Small Groups on Divergent Thinking: A Large-Scale Study Using Synchronous Electronic Brainstorming

Numerous studies have examined the effects of gender diversity in groups on creative performance, and no clear effect has been identified. Findings depend on situational cues making gender diversity more or less salient in groups. A large-scale study on two cohorts (N = 2,261) was conducted among business students to examine the impact of the gender diversity in small groups on divergent thinking in an idea-generation task performed by synchronous electronic brainstorming. Participants were automatically randomized in three- or four-member groups to generate ideas during 10 min on a gendered or neutral task. Then, five categories of groups where the proportion of men/women in groups varied from three/four men to three/four women were compared to examine creative performance on three divergent thinking measures (fluency, flexibility, and originality). A Multivariate Generalized Linear Mixed Model (mGLMM) showed greater fluency in all-women groups than in other groups (except mixed-gender groups composed of two men and two women), and more specifically “solo” groups composed of a single woman/man among a majority of men/women. For flexibility and originality, the superiority of all-women groups was found only in comparison to “solo” groups composed of a single woman. As gender differences are more salient in “solo” groups than in other groups faultlines may appear in groups, leading to a deleterious impact on creative performance