Search

Background: Educational outcomes in the United Kingdom vary as a function of students' family background, with those of lower socioeconomic status (SES) and certain ethnic minority groups among the worst affected. Aims: This pre-registered study investigates: (i) whether knowledge about students' socioeconomic and ethnic background influences teachers' judgements about the quality of their work and potential for the future, and (ii) the role of teachers' beliefs--most notably about meritocracy--in their practices. Sample: Our findings are based on the responses of 416 in-service (88%) and trainee (12%) teachers who successfully passed several stringent exclusion criteria. Methods: As part of a 2 × 2 independent measures design, teachers were randomly assigned to assess an identical piece of work ostensibly written by a student who varied by SES (higher vs. lower) and ethnicity (White British vs. Black Caribbean). Following this, they responded to several measures assessing their beliefs about education. Results: Teachers judged students of lower SES to be inferior to students of higher SES across a range of indicators. By contrast, we found no evidence of racial bias in teachers' judgements, though potential reasons for this are discussed. Teachers who believed that schooling is meritocratic were significantly less likely to support equity-enhancing teaching practices and initiatives. Conclusions: Unconscious teacher biases and beliefs may be contributing to the relative underperformance of students from poorer backgrounds. These findings provide a mandate for educational institutions to help teachers reflect upon, and develop the skills required to mitigate potentially harmful biases.

Objective: School closures due to the COVID-19 pandemic left millions of pupils to continue their education at home. We investigated gender and socioeconomic inequalities in pupils' home learning, and some mechanisms underlying those inequalities. Method: We analysed online survey responses from 3,167 parents collected between May and July 2020 in the UK, when most schools were closed. Results: Boys, pupils who were eligible for free school meals (FSM), pupils from families that were financially struggling, and pupils whose parents had not graduated from university were less engaged and spent less time home learning. Pupils of non-graduate parents found home learning challenging because they were less likely to have someone in their home who could supervise their work. Pupils eligible for FSM and from financially struggling families found home learning challenging because of noise, a lack of space, lack of technology and insufficient internet in their homes. The quality of educational resources schools provided positively predicted engagement and learning for all pupils. Conclusion: Pupils from lower socioeconomic status families and boys were less involved with home learning, although for different reasons. We discuss how these findings can inform policy and practice to reduce educational inequalities resulting from school closures.

University students in paid employment have less time for studying, report more stress, and participate in fewer extracurricular activities than non-employed students. These negative outcomes that result from combining work and study can cause employed students to experience the domains of work, study, and social life as practically incompatible, but also to experience a sense of identity incompatibility. Therefore, we used insights from previous quantitative and qualitative data on employed students and previous work on identity incompatibility to generate two research questions (RQs): RQ1. What type(s) of incompatibility (practical, identity or other) do employed students experience? and RQ2. What strategies have they adopted to reduce the experienced incompatibility? In order to answer these questions, we performed a thematic analysis with a deductive approach on transcripts from 21 UK university students who we interviewed. The students reported two types of incompatibilities: practical incompatibility, which stems from the lack of time, lack of energy, and lack of social contact associated with combining work and study; and identity incompatibility, which emanates from status differences and differences between one's own and others' perception of oneself. In order to reduce or resolve these incompatibilities, the students also developed practical (e.g. taking paid leave) and cognitive (e.g. compartmentalising contexts) strategies. Finally, the students also noted how the experience of practical incompatibility can reaffirm their values of hard work and productivity and make them resilient learners.

Background: School students who are eligible for reduced or free school meals (FSM) -- an indicator of economic disadvantage -- have lower academic attainment than their peers. Aims: We investigated whether identity compatibility -- the perceived compatibility between one's social identities and the stereotype of a high-achieving student -- contributes to this socioeconomic attainment gap, and whether the association between socioeconomic status and identity compatibility is moderated by school context. Sample: Our sample was 4,629 students aged 15-16 years old across 29 schools in England. Method: We assessed students' perceptions of identity compatibility via self-report questionnaires 8 months prior to them taking national, standardized exams. Results: Multilevel regression analyses revealed a negative indirect effect from eligibility for FSM to exam results via identity compatibility. These effects existed even while accounting for students' gender and language status, other psychological variables known to predict academic attainment, and their previous exam results. Furthermore, school context moderated the relationship between FSM eligibility and identity compatibility. In line with the identities in context model of educational inequalities, there was a significant negative association between FSM and identity compatibility only for students attending schools in which there was previously a relatively large socioeconomic attainment gap. Conclusions: Our results demonstrate the importance of social psychological variables in explaining educational inequalities, and of the local educational context in determining the educational experience of students from lower socioeconomic status backgrounds.

This paper describes an independently evaluated randomised controlled trial of a self-affirmation intervention, replicating earlier studies, mostly conducted in the US with ethnic minority students. Self-affirmation theory suggests that some stigmatised groups, such as those from ethnic minority or poor families, face stereotype threats which undermine their academic performance. Engaging in value affirmation writing activities when such threats are most salient can give individuals a positive sense of value, negating harmful feelings, and fostering academic learning. The present study, involving 10,807 pupils aged 14 to 16 in England showed that the intervention can be successfully replicated with children from low socioeconomic backgrounds in England. The analysis showed positive effects for the intervention group. Pupils who completed more exercises also performed better. The findings are worth consideration given that it costs virtually nothing and does no harm.

Schools serving diverse and low‐income communities tend to have disproportionately high numbers of low‐quality or inexperienced teachers, thereby creating an inequality of access to high‐quality teaching. Across two pre‐registered experiments and one exploratory survey (Ntotal = 956), we investigated the factors associated with trainee teachers’ bias in school choices, and the role of teacher education in mitigating this issue. In Studies 1 and 3, trainee teachers demonstrated a preference for working in a school with average (vs. diverse/low‐income) demographics, even though all other aspects of the school were equal. These disparities were most pronounced when trainees more strongly believed that (a) educational inequality can be attributed to external factors; (b) intelligence is fixed, and (c) schooling is truly meritocratic. Study 2 revealed that levels of equity‐related input during initial teacher education vary hugely, but that, where implemented, it may better prepare trainees for the challenges associated with teaching in diverse and low‐income communities. Finally, Study 3 revealed tentative evidence to suggest that a brief intervention that challenges teachers to think beyond the internal causes of inequality could reduce some of these troubling disparities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous research has linked working for pay while attending university with negative academic and health outcomes; yet, working students are often resilient when experiencing such adverse circumstances. This makes it crucial to explore potential psychological mechanisms that transform adverse experiences into sources of motivation and persistence for working students. We explore one mechanism—social identification—and its different foci—identifying as a student, employee, working student, or a student of one's discipline of study—as potential predictors of important academic (academic self-efficacy, approaches to learning, and academic achievement) and social (status in society) outcomes in three cross-sectional studies. In Study 1, part-time working hours (but not identification processes) were associated with academic self-efficacy. In Study 2, discipline identification and part-time working hours were associated with using deep approaches to learning. In Study 3, student identification was associated with increased status in society. Overall, discipline identification may be solely linked to academic outcomes, but student identification should be explored further as a potential enhancer of social and graduate outcomes. We discuss additional mechanisms that can help to transform working students' experiences through their social identities and suggest boundary conditions that can affect the link between these identities and important outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Teachers' judgements and interactions may be influenced by the backgrounds of their students, yet research shows that they may be reluctant to accept evidence relating to such biases. We investigated teachers' perceptions of their own and others' biases and explored whether a brief self-affirmation manipulation—which tends to reduce defensive responding— could increase their acknowledgement of personal and institutional bias. UK-based teachers (N = 288) completed either a values affirmation or control task before reading a mildly threatening research-based article about unconscious bias in education. Overall, teachers exhibited a bias blind spot, whereby they were more likely to perceive unconscious bias as an issue for other teachers to contend with rather than as a concern for themselves. Self-affirmed teachers were more likely to agree to have their teaching filmed to explore if/where personal biases may exist. Nevertheless, the self-affirmation did not alter levels of overall acceptance of the issue or perceptions of personal relevance. Exploratory analyses suggested that greater support for equity-enhancing teaching practices among teachers was associated with increased acknowledgement of bias and support for anti-bias initiatives. The findings suggest that self-affirmation may offer limited scope for improving acknowledgement of biases and that more work needs to be done to challenge and change the narrative of prejudice in schooling, from one that concerns only a few 'bad apples' to one that is accepted as an issue for all educators to be aware of and responsible for. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Public Significance Statement Endorsement of the employed student identity can provide social support for employed students or protection from negative intergroup comparisons. However, not much is known about what identity aspects or characteristics comprise the employed student identity and how they become important and central to that identity. Using data from 215 employed university students in the UK, we investigated two research questions (RQ's) in this mixed‐method study. RQ1. What are the identity aspects that participants ascribe to the employed student identity? RQ2. Are identity aspects that distinguish employed from non‐employed students, and are considered more suitable for employed versus non‐employed students, more central and more important to the employed students’ self‐concept? A thematic analysis categorized the identity aspects that participants self‐generated into 14 distinct categories, with the most important categories being hard‐working, being organized, having motivation, and discipline. Multilevel analyses of identity aspects within individuals revealed that distinctiveness was negatively associated with the importance and centrality of aspects, whereas suitability for employed students was positively associated with the importance and centrality of aspects. We offer practical value through revealing important identity aspects which inoculate employed students against negative intergroup comparisons, and theoretical value through suggesting future avenues for employed students’ identity construction.Being an employed student carries a social cost but defining as one can help in obtaining social support or protecting from negative comparisons with non‐employed students. We identify fourteen categories of aspects that can define oneself as an employed student (e.g., motivation, hard work) with employed students experiencing those aspects which are more suitable to them as more identity‐defining, and those aspects which differentiate them from non‐employed students as less identity‐defining. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

System Justification Theory (SJT) postulates that individuals are motivated to justify the status quo, including the paradoxical prediction that those who are disadvantaged (e.g., lower social status) by the prevailing system will justify the system more than those who are advantaged by the prevailing system. We test if this assumption holds in an entire sample, or only among subsets of a sample using a bottom‐up approach, Correlational Class Analysis. Using a representative sample from four European countries (Ntotal = 5157) we found six subpopulations. The first subpopulation (Justifiers, ntotal = 1256; 24%) was consistent with SJT, that is, system justification and social status were negatively correlated. The second subpopulation (Rejectors, ntotal = 1688; 33%), however, was characterized by a positive correlation between social status and system justification, which contrasts with the prediction of system justification theory. The other four subpopulations (Ntotal = 2211; 43%) were characterized by an ambivalent pattern. That is, at least one social status indicator, but not all, supported the prediction that disadvantaged individuals justified the system more than advantaged individuals. These heterogeneous patterns would be undetected using traditional approaches. Further, our results show that inequality salience is lower, trust in political institutions is higher, and support for political violence is higher among Justifiers compared to Rejectors. We discuss how understanding the interrelations between multiple indicators of social status and how they differ between subpopulations can help us to obtain a more comprehensive picture regarding under which circumstances and for whom system justification theory applies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ingroup bias is often treated as the default outcome of intergroup comparisons. We argue that the mechanisms of impression formation depend on what information people infer from groups. We differentiate between belief-indicative groups that are more informative of beliefs and affect attitudes through ingroup bias and status-indicative groups that are more informative of status and affect attitudes through a preference for higher status. In a cross-cultural factorial experiment (N total = 1,281), we demonstrate that when information about targets' multiple group memberships is available, belief-indicative groups affect attitudes via ingroup bias, whereas status-indicative groups—via preference for higher status. These effects were moderated by social-structural context. In two follow-up studies (N total = 451), we develop and validate a measure of belief- and status-indicativeness (BISI) of groups. BISI showed expected correlations with related constructs of entitativity and essentialism. Belief-indicativeness of groups was a better predictor of ingroup bias than entitativity and essentialism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]