«VFW .3\:I-u y 1*. '5, 1".u‘1"‘9‘ v 5...“? --¢.q . ,q ,, .m- . . v .n n fir}? (r’. 4 ,. v", 1 a van :. ' p l ",- ‘ 32:11:73.. I at": v -r In “a”; l: .l,,'.ff..,‘.... .. ‘. 1.“; 3mm; ‘f; $3.4; ’r‘a‘h" .37.. 'a .. In? rm,‘ 4 .‘r ~ «- r "lvf".”' - tr . ' ' ’- . .. r u. ”."1 " ""11- : ' ‘ ;::‘:1:£:" f :r J - . »u u» . Ar ’3- ’r ynfll «0 " " try"! . 3 .. ,. . . "v ,., u ~- ~ptml~| . .,....‘.,.. n Ln.“ 3,”. . .""" ¢ r m I ' II' ' .. .. o: - . ' » ' r I A v t , .-., y H} 3 1'1}! ‘ - ' , ~ “ "' ' J au- . ‘ ‘ ..‘_ . fl .1 T ‘ :¢ ' . m. ~ ~' 1‘ a.“ ... r w'LWP ' ‘ . . M w .. .r I r .. .-:.:.nr\-u . ,. . '2.“ . 1." r- -u lu-mh“: ..:;..:..-, 1.“. ” :",-." qufl. .r....,.'!, .w" um .— V- "-7 I. ap’ u mum-y- ”my-m'unr. :— «I, I .~ who r «1-7 :1.“ u ~ p. wk" . - - . L “.31.; r r: f q", Jul: n.-. 1 7-7-- I... "n.2,... ! .- ' c '7- l , n... -~n' 5.1 . ~- 1:.” afor-u'TIAIV‘ , 'r 3,“. -.:..:.n:.,. ..- ,._..... .. .,. w -.. . \ 1 11 1111 131121 11 This is to certify that the dissertation entitled A Comparison of the Expecation for Achievement that Minority Teachers and White Teachers have toward Minority and White Students presented by Peggy Jeanne Starr has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph. D degree in K-8 Administration Date 02/26/92 MSU is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 0-12771 '- i-._._-__ UIR w .1 a tint-.11 “i: ran ‘2 ' ,. . _ r U 3."?- F :‘f' "‘- P.“ hath " I. in "'1‘ aJQéJ ‘ '1 :2 — r"wl PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record. TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due. DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE MSU Is An Affirmative ActiorVEquel Opportunity Institution cAeiMMS-M A COMPARISON OF THE EXPECTATION FOR ACHIEVEMENT THAT MINORITY TEACHERS AND WHITE TEACHERS HAVE TOWARD MINORITY AND WHITE STUDENTS By Peggy Jeanne Starr A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Educational Administration 1992 ABSTRACT A COMPARISON OF THE EXPECTATION FOR ACHIEVEMENT THAT MINORITY TEACHERS AND WHITE TEACHERS HAVE TOWARD MINORITY AND WHITE STUDENTS By Peggy Jeanne Starr The purpose of this study was to determine whether minority teachers have higher expectations for minority students than white teachers do, thereby influencing their achievement not only as role models but also through the preconceived expectations they have of the potential success of the students. A secondary purpose was to determine whether there is a difference in the expectations that minority and white teachers have for white students. A questionnaire was completed by 29 middle school teachers in three school districts in Michigan. The questionnaire had a preselected list of students’ names on it, and the teachers were asked to predict the achievement level in high school of the students on the list. The race of the students was not written on the questionnaire until a later time. Eight different teams of teachers were found that had a representation on them of white and minority teachers and white and minority students. The statistics of four of the teams were used because more than five of the same minority students were rated by more than two teachers, which was Peggy Jeanne Starr the criterion established for the analysis. The chi-square test of correlation was used at the .05 level of significance. The general hypothesis for this study was: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of white and minority students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. This hypothesis was then divided into 45 subhypotheses. Results of the analysis of the data collected from the four teams who met the criterion of having more than five minority students rated by more than two teachers showed that there was no significant difference in the way minority and white teachers rated the later success level of minority students. Only one analysis, in a comparison of how white and minority teachers rated the potential achievement of boys only, done with the total group, proved the hypothesis null and therefore was significant at the .05 level. I dedicate this dissertation to my husband, Warren, who has made my life wonderful and whose love and support have encouraged me to complete this project; to my sons, Andy and Ben, and my friend Audrey, who continually asked me, "When is it going to be done?"; and to my stepsons, Peer and BJ, who have added more fun to my life. I dedicate this to my parents, Glen and Arlene Anderson, who have always shown interest in and been enthusiastic about whatever I have attempted. iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank Dr. Bob Soderman, principal of Waverly Middle School; John Armstrong, assistant superintendent of the Mount Clemens Schools; Robert Twomley, principal of McKinley Middle School; and Dr. Nathel Burtley, superintendent of the Flint Schools, who helped with the project. I also want to thank Cricket Aldrich, secretary of Waverly Community Schools, for helping me with this project in many ways. A special thank-you is given to Dr. Louis Romano, who always had the time to offer advice and whose enthusiamn was a factor in the completion of this dissertation. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES ....................... viii Chapter I. INTRODUCTION .................... 1 Background of the Problem ............. 2 Purpose of the Study ............... 6 Importance of the Study .............. 6 Assumption .................... 7 Limitations of the Study ............. 7 Definition of Terms ................ 8 Summary and Overview ............... 9 11. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE .............. 10 Factors That Affect the Achievement of Minority Students . . . . ................ TO The Importance of Minority Teachers as Role Models for Minority Students .......... 27 Teacher Expectations and Student Achievement . . . 31 III. DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY ............... 6T Introduction ................... 6l The Research Sample ................ 6l Hypothesis and Subhypotheses ........... 66 Instrument and Procedure ............. 67 Research Design .................. 69 Summary ...................... 70 IV. ANALYSIS OF THE DATA ................ 7l Frequency Distribution .............. 72 Results of the Hypothesis Testing ......... 73 Team 3 ..................... 74 Team 5 ..................... 83 Team 6 ..................... 93 Team 7 ..................... 103 Total Group ................... ll3 Summary ...................... l23 vi V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, DISCUSSION, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY ......... Summary ...................... Purpose of the Study . . . . . . . ....... Procedures ................... Findings and Conclusions ............. Team 3 ..................... Team 5 ..................... Team 6 ..................... Team 7 ..................... Total Group ................... Discussion .................... Implications ................... Recommendations for Further Research ....... OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO vii LIST OF TABLES Table Page l. Comparison of Rating Score by Teacher Race--ATT Students on the Team: Team 3 ............ 75 2. Comparison of Rating Score by Teacher Race--White Students Only: Team 3 ............... 76 3. Comparison of Rating Score by Teacher Race--Minority Students Only: Team 3 ............... 77 4. Comparison of Rating Score by Teacher Race--White Male Students Only: Team 3 ............. 78 5. Comparison of Rating Score by Teacher Race--Minority Male Students Only: Team 3 ............. 79 6. Comparison of Rating Score by Teacher Race-~White Female Students Only: Team 3 ............ 80 7. Comparison of Rating Score by Teacher Race--Minority Female Students Only: Team 3 ............ 8T 8. Comparison of Rating Score by Teacher Race--Boys Only: Team 3 .................... 82 9. Comparison of Rating Score by Teacher Race--Girls Only: Team 3 .................... 83 TO. Comparison of Rating Score by Teacher Race--ATT Students on the Team: Team 5 ............ 84 ll. Comparison of Rating Score by Teacher Race-—White Students Only: Team 5 ............... 85 T2. Comparison of Rating Score by Teacher Race--Minority Students Only: Team 5 ............... 86 T3. Comparison of Rating Score by Teacher Race—~White Male Students Only: Team 5 ............. 87 14. Comparison of Rating Score by Teacher Race-~Minority Male Students Only: Team 5 ............. 88 viii IS. 16. T7. 18. T9. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. Comparison of Rating Score by Female Students Only: Comparison of Rating Score by Female Students Only: Comparison of Rating Score by Only: Comparison of Rating Score by Only: Comparison of Rating Score by Students on the Team: Team Comparison of Rating Score by Students Only: Team 6 Comparison of Rating Score by Students Only: Team 6 Comparison of Rating Score by Male Students Only: Team 6 Comparison of Rating Score by Male Students Only: Team 6 Comparison of Rating Score by Female Students Only: Team Comparison of Rating Score by Female Students Only: Team Comparison of Rating Score by Only: Comparison of Rating Score by Only: Comparison of Rating Score by Students on the Team: Team Comparison of Rating Score by Students Only: Team 7 Comparison of Rating Score by Students Only: Team 7 ix Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher 6 ............ Teacher 0000000000000 Teacher 6 ............ Teacher 6 ............ Teacher Teacher Teacher Race--White Team 5 ............ Race--Minority Team 5 ............ Race--Boys Team 5 .................... Race--Girls Team 5 .................... Race--All Race-~White Race--White Race--Minority Race--Boys Team 6 .................... Race--Girls Team 6 .................... Race-—ATT 000000000000000 Page 89 90 91 92 94 95 96 97 98 99 TOO TOT 102 104 105 106 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. Comparison of Rating Score by Teacher Male Students Only: Comparison of Rating Score by Teacher Male Students Only: Comparison of Rating Score by Teacher Female Students Only: Comparison of Rating Score by Teacher Female Students Only: Comparison of Rating Score by Teacher Only: Comparison of Rating Score by Teacher Only: Comparison of Rating Score by Teacher Students on the Team: Total Group Comparison of Rating Score by Teacher Students Only: Comparison of Rating Score by Teacher Students Only: Comparison of Rating Score by Teacher Male Students Only: Total Group Comparison of Rating Score by Teacher Male Students Only: Total Group Comparison of Rating Score by Teacher Female Students Only: Total Group Comparison of Rating Score by Teacher Female Students Only: Total Group Comparison of Rating Score by Teacher Only: Total Group Comparison of Rating Score by Teacher Only: Total Group Race--White Team 7 ............. Race--Minority Team 7 ............. Race-~White Team 7 ............ Race--Minority Team 7 ............ Race--Boys Team 7 .................... Race-~Girls Team 7 .................... Race--ATT Race--White Total Group ............. Race--Minority Total Group ............. Race-~White OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Page 107 108 109 110 111 112 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 122 123 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION The main goal of school districts today should be the commitment to the education of all students. In a speech given by Andrew Young in October 1991 to the American Association of School Personnel Administrators in Atlanta, speaking about the operation of a large city, he said, It takes money to run a city and money to run a school district. If the money runs short in a city the residents still get water and garbage pickup. We do not provide services to only a percentage of the residents. Everyone must have these services. The same should be true of the public schools. All students must be educated. As the percentage of the minority population in the United \ States increases and as the dropout rate continues to increase, it 1 becomes more and more important to discover what it takes to make ;’ J I J ."j‘ all students successful. In this study, the researcher looked at whether minority teachers have higher expectations for minority students than white teachers. do. Given that higher expectations do influence the performance of students, the race of the teachers was used as a control in studying their prediction of the expectations they had for students’ performance in their later school career; Background of the Problem There has been a long history of discrepancy between the school performance of white children and of black and Hispanic children. Although much effort has been made in recent years to improve the performance of these children, the gap seems to remain. A survey by the American Association of College and Universities showed enrollment of bJack students 'hi college institutions down 11% and Hispanic enrollment down 16% since 1975, while white enrollment continues to increase (Brooks, T987, p. 238). In the September 20, 1989, issue of Education Week, a study was reported about dropouts: Based on the data from the Census Bureau and the NCEA’s High School and Beyond longitudinal survey, the study found that, on average 4.4 percent of students in grades 10-12 dropped out of school annually between 1985 and 1988. The 1985-1988 figures were higher for minorities and older students, with blacks dropping out. at. a rate of 5.78m percent, Hispanics at 9.27 percent, and whites 4.20 percent. (Washington Report, 1989, p. 12) ‘“ ‘- "While the report shows some progress," said the former Secretary of Education Lauro F. Cavazos, "I find much in it alarming. The nation cannot rest any easier based upon our findings" (Washington Report, 1989, p. 12). In 'the same issue, discussion took. place about the average scores on the nation’s American College Test (ACT) and Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT). Walsh (1989) stated the following about the scores of minority students: After several years of increases, the average verbal score for black students taking the SAT declined in 1989, from 353 to 351, while their average math score rose by 2 points, to 386. i l f ‘1 l l / Since 1979, blacks have gained 21 points on the verbal portion and 28 points on the math test. Mexican-Americans posted a decrease of one point on the verbal test, to 381, but gained two points in math, to 430. On the ACT, the national composite score for black students remained unchanged for 1989, at 13.6, while the score for non- Hispanic whites declined by .2 point, to 19.4. Composite scores on the ACT for others included: Mexican-Americans, 15.4, a decrease of .3 point; Puerto Ricans, Cubans, and other Hispanics, 17.0, a drop of .1 point. (p. 5) Although recent. ACT’ results have shown an increase in the number of minority students taking the test and a steady trend of improvement of the scores, a wide gap between the scores of Hispanic and black students and white students remains. It has been predicted that, by the year 2020, the Hispanic population will have expanded from 6.4% to 14.7% of the general population and the black population will have expanded from 11.7% to 14% of the general population--more than one-fourth. In 20 years, it is predicted that 40% of the American work force will be minorities (Cooper, 1988, p. 123). Of all the major racial groups in American schools, Hispanics have the highest dropout rates. "In 1983, only 50.3% of Hispanics aged 18-19 years had graduated from high school, compared to 75.6% of whites and 59.1% of blacks (U.S. Department of Labor, 1983)" (Velez, 1989, p. 119). Therefore, understanding, explaining, and finding ways to improve black and Hispanic students’ school performance should be a major national educational concern. A modern anthropologist who has studied extensively about the educational achievement of minority students is John U. Ogbu. 0gbu (1987) has been concerned most in his studies with a central issue: "Why do some minority students cross cultural boundaries and opportunity barriers and succeed in school and why do others fail?" He stated: By comparing the schooling of minority children from different cultural backgrounds it is evident that all minority children encounter social adjustment and academic learning problems, at least initially. For some minority groups these tend to diminish over time, so that they eventually learn more or less successfully. For some other minority groups the problems tend 10 pe{s;st and may even increase in magnitude and seriousness. p. 3 7 Ogbu then went on to say, While cultural, language, and opportunity barriers are very important for all minorities, the main factor differentiating the more successful from the less successful minorities appears to be the nature of the history, subordination, and exploitation of the minorities, and the nature of the minorities’ own instrumental and expressive responses to their treatment, which enter into the process of their schooling. In other words, school performance is not due only to what is done to or for the minorities; it is also due to the fact that the nature of the minorities’ interpretations and responses makes them more or less accomplices to their own school success or failure. (p. 317) Ogbu explained that historical research has shown that there have always been factors within the school setting that have operated against minority children’s academic performance. Among the subtle mechanisms that have been found in such a situation is the lowered expectation of teachers and adminis- trators. Then, too, there are problems arising from cultural differences between minority students and school personnel. The failure of school personnel to understand and respect minority children’s culturally learned behaviors often results in conflicts that obstruct children’s adjustment and learning. (p. 319) Although anthropologists have cited many factors relative to the school achievement of minority children, this researcher focused on whether the expectations of teachers toward the potential school achievement of their students vary according to the race of the rater. Researchers have found ‘that 'teachers differentiate expectations for various students, that teachers act on these expectations by treating students differently, and that because "students perceive this differential treatment and infer implica- tions about what is expected of them, the stage is set for the effects on student achievement that are initiated through effects in self-concept, motivation, expectations and attributions" (Good, 1987, p. 37). 1 Studies of school effectiveness and school improvement programs reviewed by Good and Brophy (cited in Good, 1987) indicated that high expectations and commitment to bringing about student achieve- ment are part of a pattern of attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors that characterize schools that are successful in maximizing students’ learning gains. Brookover, Beady, Flood, Schweitzer, and Wisenbaker (cited in Good, 1987) found that teachers in effective schools "not only held higher expectations but acted on them by setting goals 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" (p. 40). The research also has shown that expectations teachers have for students’ achievement actually influence their achievement. The importance of role models for minority students has been emphasized for many years. As a guest editor in the Journal of Negro Education, Cooper (1988) wrote that "BJack children’s. achievement is significantly affected by teachers’ perceptions, as well as their own self-perceptions" (p. 123). Minority teachers as role models present an example of what minority students can achieve. Not only can minority teachers act as role models for black and Hispanic students, but because they have found success in the educational realm it is possible that they have higher expectations for these students. Purpose of the Study The researcher’s main purpose in this study was to determine whether Ininority teachers have higher expectations for minority students than white teachers do, thereby influencing their achievement not only as role models but also through the preconceived expectations they have of the potential success of the students. A secondary purpose was to determine whether there is a difference in the expectations that minority and white teachers have for white students. Importance of the Study The study can provide valuable information about the achievement of black and Hispanic students. Because it can be assumed that higher expectations for achievement actually influence achievement positively, if minority teachers have higher expectations for minority students than white teachers it can be determined that the need for larger numbers of minority teachers in the schools is even more crucial than first thought--not only fer providing students with a vision of "what can be," but in expecting them to reach that vision. If there is a difference in expectations that white and minority teachers have for white and minority students, the need for inservice education to give teachers the skill to have high expectations for all students regardless of race is crucial. Assumption The investigator assumed from the research that has been done about teachers’ expectations and achievement that the expectation the teacher has for the achievement of a particular student does influence the achievement of that student. Limitations of the Study 1. The study was limited to black, white, and Hispanic school teachers who were teaching in a teaming situation with other teachers. 2. The teachers were asked to rate the potential achievement of only white, Hispanic, and black students who were randomly selected for the study. 3. If there is not a significant difference in the expecta- tions that black and Hispanic teachers have for black and Hispanic students, the presence of black and Hispanic teachers may still positively influence the achievement of these students. 4. The number of students used in actual teaming situations was small where teachers were rating the same students because teams of fewer than five minority students to be rated in common were eliminated. Although an analysis was done in general of the ratings of minority students, this analysis was not as valid because the students were not rated totally by the same teachers and their actual achievement potential was not factored in. 5. The rating sheet would have been more meaningful if the ratings had been better defined to the rater. More differentiation should have been made between the two ratings of: will graduate with C’s and 0’s and average student in high school. The definitions listed in the following section of this dissertation should have been shared with the raters. Definition of Terms Achievement. High achievement was defined as maintaining an A or B average in high school and gaining academic recognition through advanced placement classes, honoraries, and so on. Average achieve- ment was defined basically as a C average. Low achievement was defined as having difficulty in passing classes and the possibility of not graduating from high schbol. Minority. For the purpose of this study, minority meant a black or Hispanic person. Teacher expectations. These expectations are inferences that teachers make about the future behavior or academic achievement of their students, based on what they know about these students now. 53W Chapter I included a description of the general nature of the study, indicating the background of the problem and its importance, the purpose of the study, some basic assumptions and the limitations, and definitions of key terms. Chapter II is a review of literature in the areas of teacher expectations, the importance of minorities as role models, and research on factors affecting the achievement of minority students. A description of the procedures used in the study, the sources of data, and the design of the study are presented in Chapter 111. Chapter IV is devoted to the presen- tation and interpretation of the data. Chapter V includes the summary and conclusions derived from this study, along with recom- mendations for further research. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Factors That Affect the Achievement of Minority Students In the article "Variability in Minority School Performance: A Problem in Search of an Explanation," Ogbu (1987) drew the following conclusions: At the national level, Coleman (1966) reports that Asian- American students do better than blacks, Mexican Americans, Native Americans and Puerto Ricans in reading, verbal ability, and math tests. As reported in the New York Times (Slade, 1982), Asian American students did better than other language and cultural minorities on the SAT administered by the Educational Testing Service 'hi 1980—81. Asian American students are, of course, not the only language and cultural minorities doing well in school. A comparative study of various Hispanics in the United States reveals some variability too. The result of a recent comparative study of Hispanic high school dropouts and graduates in a southwestern city found that students who were born in Mexico were less likely to drop out than those born in the United States (Valverde, 1987). (p. 315) Ogbu (1987) found that much of the research has shown that the minority groups who are doing well in school are the ones who differ more from the dominant group in language and culture. Ogbu stated, in referring to a difference in achievement of minority children: While cultural, language, and opportunity barriers are very important for all minorities, the main factor differentiating the more successful from the less successful minorities appears to be the nature of the history, subordination, and exploitation of the minorities, and the nature of the minorities. The main factor' differentiating the more successful from the less successful minorities appears to be the nature of the minorities’ own instrumental and expressive 10 11 responses to their treatment, which enter into the process of their schooling. In other words, school performance is not due only to what is done to or for the minorities; it is also due to the fact that the nature of the minorities’ interpretations and responses makes them more or less accomplices to their own success or failure. (p. 317) Schools operate according to the norms of society and the communities in which they exist. Teachers and administrators have a lowered expectation of minority children. "The failure of school personnel to understand and respect minority children’s culturally learned behaviors often results irI conflicts that obstruct children’s adjustment and learning" (Ogbu, 1987, p. 319). Ogbu (1987) stated further: The evidence that this treatment by society at large and by the schools affects how ‘the Ininorities perceive and respond to schooling is found in 'the autobiographies of’ many minority individuals, in interviews with minority parents and students, and in public discussions of educational, employment, and other problems facing the minorities. (p. 319) Jere Brophy (1987), who has done a great deal of research on the expectations of teachers and how they relate to student achievement, wrote an article on strategies for motivating students to learn. In that article he stated: Student motivation to learn is an acquired competence developed through general experience but stimulated most directly through modeling, communication of expectations and direct instruction or socialization by significant others (especially parents and teachers. . . . The effort people will expend on a task is a product of (l) the degree to which they expect to be able to perform the task successfully if they apply themselves and (2) the degree to which they value participation in the task itself or the benefits or rewards that successful task completion will bring to them. (p. 40) In an article about children at risk, Howe and Edelman (1986) emphasized that we cannot afford to leave underdeveloped the talents 12 of children who happen to be born different "by virtue of race, language, sex, or income status" (p. 111) They stated, "Education is a fundamental right deserving protection under the 14th Amendment, which guarantees all Americans equal protection under the laws" (p. 112). The statistics show that black students are placed in classes for the mildly mentally handicapped at rates more than three times those of white children. The authors further stated, "It costs only $500 to provide a year of compensatory education to a student before he or she gets into academic trouble. It costs over 53000 when one such student repeats one grade once" (p. 113). Also, dropout rates for black students are just under twice as great as for white students; those for Hispanic students are just over twice as great. In a study of Hispanic students in La Victoria, Colorado, the question considered was why some Hispanic students stay in school whereas others drop out (Jordan, 1982). In a paper presented to the American Anthropological Association, Jordan cited another study, the Kamehameha Early Education Program, the results of which showed that: Cultural compatibility contributes to school success and incompatibility contributes to failure. The most convincing aspect of research on the compatibility premise in the research on the early education program points to the quality of interaction between teachers and students as the cwjtical feature in achievement. M011 and Diaz (1984) attempted to explain the difference in achievement of Spanish-speaking Mexican students. They claimed that: 13 The teachers provide an opportunity in which their students may realize their maximum potential by organizing their students’ learning experience to garner the social, linguistic, and intellectual resources which the students bring to the classroom. (p. 307) Delgado-Gaitan (1988) found that the factor in keeping Hispanic students in school "is not necessarily one of valuing the student as a human being, but one of conformity in the school system for the ultimate purpose of completing the diploma" (p. 378). In an article about high-risk youths, Farnworth, Schweinhart, and Berrueta-Clement (1985) noted that teachers were able to rate quite accurately the conduct and personality traits of students in kindergarten in "dishonest activities, escape behaviors, and group delinquency" (p. 459). These findings may be viewed as evidence for teachers’ "prescience in recognizing as early as kindergarten those students who will become involved in delinquency. At the same time, the possibility cannot be dismissed that there is some labeling youngsters identified as troublemakers" (p. 461). In an article about the school achievement of black children, Spencer, Kim, and Marshall (1987) expressed the theory that: The experiences of children are affected by the reference group’s societal placement. Black Americans are categorized as castelike minorities and they experience differences which have negative consequences for school-related outcomes. They are considered castelike in that they experience as a whole a job ceiling potential. (p. 77) The authors went on to state that membership in the same racial group does not necessitate similar school performance: Given the ecological niche which often accompanies caste membership, an apparent demeanor of hopelessness and helplessness perceived for many minority children in academic settings may reflect coping efforts in response to uncontrollable, stable-appearing events. (pp. 79-80) 14 An interesting discovery was that castelike minority-group children generally have lower test scores; however, when members of a castelike minority group emigrate to another society, the twin problems of low 10 test scores and low academic achievement seem to disappear (Spencer et al., 1987). In a 1985 study, Lee developed a profile from personal interviews with 68 black students identified by teachers as successful, often despite social or economic hardship. Most of the studies of this type have been done of black students living in cities, but according to the U.S. Bureau of the Census figures for 1978, approximately 26%. of the black population lives in rural areas. The focus of the investigation was to identify psychological and social variables that appeared to successfully influence the transaction between black youths and the rural educational system. Lee found that: School plays an important part in the lives of these students. As a group they have positive overall feelings about school. Attitudes 'toward and relationships. with teachers range from moderately to extremely positive. The most favorable attitudes are expressed toward those teachers perceived as being understanding of the needs and concerns of students, offering encouragement, and making their classes interesting. Many of the students indicated that they have good relationships with teachers who they feel are open and listen to problems or concerns. Students feel these teachers treat them in a mature manner and make themselves available. (p. 134) As a group, the students who were evaluated had a very positive view of themselves. In an article that was written in 1985, it was stated that: Though mainland Hispanics constitute 6 to 7 percent of the U.S. population, in the 1976-77 year they earned only 4.1 percent of all Associate’s degrees from community colleges and 2 percent 15 or less of all Bachelor’s, Master’s and Ph.D. degrees. In 1975 there was a 41 percent dropout rate that has increased to 45 percent in 1980. (Eric Clearinghouse, 1985, p. 47) In studies that, were done about Hispanic students’ achievement generallyg it. was found that Hispanic students are more poorly prepared for college than non-Hispanic white students. Whether true or not, cultural stereotypes about Hispanic students are believed to have a negative effect on teachers’ expectations. In a study of Mexican-American students, teachers were more likely to show disapproval toward Spanish-dominant than English-dominant students and to attribute negative characteristics to students who spoke accented or nonstandard English or nonstandard Spanish. Another study done by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, comparing teachers’ communication patterns with Mexican-American and Anglo elementary and secondary school students, showed that teachers directed praise or encouragement at the Anglo students 36% more often than at Mexican-American students. Teachers built on the spoken contributions of Anglo students 40% more often and asked Anglo students 20% more questions than they asked Mexican-American students. The results of these studies that wove together language, ethnicity, and social class factors suggested that teachers’ negative attitudes and low expectations all contributed to an lower quality of classroom experience for Hispanic students than for Anglo students (ERIC Clearinghouse, 1985). Although a study done by Vogt, Jordan, and Tharp (1987) did not involve black or Hispanic children, it did involve Native Hawaiian children, and the results relate to the subject of this 16 dissertation. In the Hawaiian school system, groups that seem to do quite well are Japanese, Chinese, and Haole children; those who do poorly academically are Filipinos, Native Hawaiians, and Samoans. Project KEEP did research to see what would help Native Hawaiians’ performance in school. Progress was realized the most in the selection of educational practices, based in part on their "cultural compatibility for Hawaiian children" (p. 279). School practices were studied, and those that were considered to be incompatible to the cultural population were changed until more effective educational practices could be instituted. As a result of this and ' other changes, the performance of Native Hawaiian children improved. Lee (1984) conducted a study about the variables related to academic success for rural black adolescents. The findings indicated that students who scored highest on the California Achievement Tests in reading and mathematics came from close and supportive family networks with strong educational and social direction from parents. Lee stated: It is also evident that these students have positive educational experiences, with school providing their major social outlet. Finally, it is apparent that students with high levels of academic achievement have highly developed social networks outside of ‘their families as well as strong identification with positive role models. (p. 432) One of the implications of the study was that: It seems important that educators ensure that Black adolescents have positive and multifaceted educational experiences. To accomplish this, it may be necessary to initiate professional development experiences designed to identify and eliminate alienating factors in the professional attitudes, behavior, or policies of rural educators which tend to overtly or covertly impinge upon the educational progress of Black students. (p. 433) 17 In an article about science achievement of disadvantaged students, it was stated that: Black students performed best on those science exercises most dependent on daily experience and common knowledge and poorest in those that involve a detached research attitude toward the object and phenomena of science. In mathematics, the most difficult problems for black students were those that are theoretical and for which there is no experimental base. (ERIC/Cue, 1985, p. 279) From the early school years, poor and minority students tend to have less classroom exposure to science and mathematics. Black l7-year- old students average only a year of high school mathematics instruction, whereas the majority of the nation’s 17 year olds have two years of high school mathematics. According to a study cited by Berryman (1983), in contrast with white students, black students’ science career plans are generally less related to their abilities. In a small study of black inner- city eighth graders, Jacobowitz (1980) found that a preference for a science career was unrelated to science achievement. Although black students actually become more favorably interested in science than white students in high school, fewer of them choose science as a major in college. Researchers have pointed to a complex pool of attitudes and motivations that indirectly affect minority students’ science preparation and their choice of a career in science (ERIC/Cue, 1985). Some of these are as follows: 1. Stereotyping can make students believe a: particular skill or area is inappropriate or lead them to fear the teachers or professionals in a particular field. 18 2. Role models help students identify with potential success in particular areas, and the lack of role models hinders students from identifying with such success. The most powerful role model is a parent, a relative, or a friend of the same gender working in the preferred profession. "Nearly ten years ago, an analysis of counseling practices showed that both black and white secondary school counselors tended to steer black students away from science- related areas" (ERIC/Cue, 1985, pp. 281-282). In a program of 11 college-bound sophomores and juniors in Texas, Welch, Hodges, and Warden (1989) discovered that: One difference between the majority culture and minority cultural frames of reference is the perception of the value of academic achievement. From the viewpoint of the minority student, school learning is perceived as a subtractive process; a minority person who learns successfully in school or who follows the standard practices of the school may be seen as becoming acculturated into the majority American cultural frame of reference at the expense of his or her nfinority cultural frame of reference. (p. 61) In the Excel program, an attempt was made to provide a scholarly identity in the students. According to Brookover (1985): The basic academic achievement of black, Hispanic, American Indian, and some other minority students, particularly those from low-income families, has been significantly lower than that of the more affluent white Anglo-Saxon Protestant students. A few Ininority groups, such as the Jewish and Japanese Americans, have excelled in academic achievement, demonstrating that minority group students need not achieve at lower levels in American schools. (p. 257) Brookover continued: Research on school effects and effective schools has come to two conclusions. One is that there are some schools, particularly elementary schools, in which students from poor 19 families, both black and white, are achieving high levels in the basic skills. The second finding of the research is that we now have identified some of the correlates of school effectiveness. (p. 263) Grant and Sleeter (1986) argued that instead of separating factors in educational research, race, class, and gender should be analyzed as integrated factors. In a study done by Freijo and Jaeger (cited in Grant & Sleeter, 1986), the teacher evaluations of students were examined, integrating the race and social class of students. These researchers found that "teachers respond somewhat differently to students of different racial groups but of the same social class background, and that they respond differently to students of different social class backgrounds but the same race" (p. 201). In analyzing other statistics, Rumberger (cited in Grant & Sleeter, 1986) found that "the higher their mother’s level of education, the more likely black and white females and black males were to stay in school, but the mother’s education level had little effect on white males or Hispanic youths" (p. 214) A study was conducted on the differences between high-, average-, and low-achieving black male and female high school students on measures of learning and study behavior, as well as on motivation and attitude (Haynes, Comer, & Hamilton-Lee, 1988). The study specifically examined "the reported use (Hi specific learning and cognitive strategies among a group of Black male and female high school students who were classified into three achievement groups" (p. 233). The findings in the study are significant in view of current concerns about how to improve the academic achievement of 20 black students. Motivations seemed the strongest variable in pre- dicting a student’s grade point average. "Clearly, motivation is not simply a response to immediate environmental rewards such as good grades or immediate positive feedback but incorporates such things as a sense of future, goal directedness, and a propensity to persevere" (p. 236). The authors went on to discuss the findings of Eccles, who said that "expectancy for success is a better predictor of achievement behavior than self-concept or attributional style" (p. 236). It seems reasonable that "one likely way to increase motivation would be to first address students’ success and achieve- ment expectations" (p. 236). Motivation was the strongest predictor for both sexes. Hispanics are the fastest-growing minority group in the United States. According to some statistics, the differences in school functioning among the various Hispanic-American subgroups are extreme. It has been reported that 21.15% of the Mexican-American sophomores dropped out of school in 1982; only 11.4% (H: the Hispanics of Central and South American origin dropped out of school that same year (Suarez-Orozco, 1987). Research was reported and conducted in two inner-city high schools containing more than 600 recent arrivals from Central America. "The teachers noted that immigrant students exerted greater effort, studied harder, and often received better grades than other minority students" (p. 289). It was also discovered that immigrant students were not a priority in the schools and were assigned to lower-level classes--many of the same classes they had taken previously in their own country. Most 21 of the Central American students were keenly aware of the degree of parental sacrifice involved in getting out of the country of origin. They therefore showed a sense of duty to their parents and family members for their suffering, which accentuated a wish to achieve and to do well in school. The students seemed to understand and be aware that, in the United States, schooling was the key to a better future for themselves and their families. In reviewing the research that has been conducted, Alexander, Entwisle, & Thompson (1987) found that "differences ‘Hl secondary- school performance by social background are trivial for youngsters of similar ability levels" (p. 665). In a paper done by Alexander and Entwisle (cited in Alexander et al., 1987), the writers concluded that: Teachers’ social origins, rather than their racial backgrounds, impair their effectiveness with certain kinds of youngsters, and black ‘youngsters’ school performance is most impaired. Students’ race remains highly resilient as a status attribute in conditioning the quality and character of student- teacher relations. (p. 670) Further, they concluded that high-status teachers, both black and white, experienced special difficulties relating in: minority youngsters. These teachers: . perceive such youngsters as relatively lacking in the qualities of personal maturity that make for a "good student, " hold lower performance expectations of them, and evaluate the school climate much less favorably when working with such students. As a result, black students who begin first grade with test scores very similar to their white age-mates have fallen noticeably behind by the year’s end. (p. 679) It seems sensible that teachers would be considered middle class just by their profession; however, there is considerable diversity in teachers’ social origins. ‘The match or nfismatch of 22 student-teacher backgrounds may be important, especially in the early grades. Alexander et a1. (1987) stated: There is a perverse irony in the possibility that minority youngsters and those from disadvantaged backgrounds suffer academically because of their marginality relative to the dominant-status culture. Many studies have shown the performance of' minority and disadvantaged youngsters to be especially sensitive to the details of their school experience and to the characteristics of their teachers. (p. 679) Erickson (1987) offered various explanations for the low school achievement of minority students, including the cultural differences between the teachers and the students. In the 19605, the lack of achievement in minority students was attributed to cultural differences in communication style between teachers and their students. This was called the "culturally relativist position" (p. 336), which provided a way of seeing classroom problems as misunder- standings teachers had because of different cultural backgrounds. Erickson further stated, "Cultural differences in ways of speaking and listening between the child’s speech network and the teacher’s speech network, according to the communication process explanation, lead to systematic and recurrent miscommunication in the classroom" (p. 337). Erickson (1987) discussed a study by Au and Mason in 1981, which demonstrated a causal connection between the cultural communication patterns of classroom discourse and academic achievement. The researchers showed that there were different communication patterns among the children; some of the patterns were 23 so different as to cause misinterpretation of some of the reading comprehension of the texts. The authors stated: In pedagogy it is essential that the teacher and students establish and maintain trust in each other at the edge of risk. To learn is to entertain risk, since learning involves moving just past the level of competence, what is already mastered, to the nearest region of incompetence, what has not yet been mastered. (p. 344) One example of cultural communication style causing a negative phenomenon in the classrooms is as follows: In some of the classrooms the teacher was white, in others the teacher was black. The speech style of the working-class black children was monitored the whole school year. In those classrooms in which the teacher, whether black or white, negatively sanctioned the children’s use of black English vernacular, by the end of the year the children spoke a more exaggerated form of that dialect than they had done at the beginning of the year. The opposite was true in the classrooms in which the teacher, whether black or white, did not negatively sanction the black English vernacular spoken by the black students. (p. 347) The authors concluded that, by looking at the sociolinguistic communication process explanation for school failure and considering the reading lesson, it can be seen that cultural difference can be an initial source of trouble between‘teachers and students. "Teachers and students in regressive relationships do not bond with each other. Mutual trust is sacrificed. Over time the students become increasingly alienated from school" (p. 348). The more alienated the students feel, the less they persist in doing school work. Consistent patterns of refusal to do school work can be seen as a resistance to a stigmatized ethnic or social-class identity that is being assigned by the school (Erickson, 1987). 24 Chimezie (1988) described the characteristics of black children that might affect their adjustment to school situations. He suggested that schools must adapt somewhat to these characteristics in order for black children to be successful. Gay and Abrahams (cited in Chimezie, T988) asserted, "It is the teacher who can be taught. to: expect and deal with cultural differences before she enters the classroom and it is the teacher who should and will have to do the changing" (p. 78). Black children have a preference for oral language rather than written language. Chimezie stated, "If the black child is oral and the school culture is literary then there is a contradiction-~a confrontation of two opposing realities" (p. 79). The behavior of black children could also be categorized as being spontaneous, which results in such behavior as speaking out of turn, not waiting to be recognized before responding to the teacher’s questions, and speaking louder than other children irI a group discussion. Black children also seem to seek stimulation, and if it is not there it is self-initiated. Therefore, format variability in the classroom is much more attractive to the black child. Pfiestrup (cited in Chimezie, 1988) stated that "vervistic teachers (psychological affinity for variability and intensity) were the most effective in teaching reading to first-grade Black children" (pp. 81-82). The writer went on to say: Black children need to be involved in some kind of activity relevant to the learning task--learning by doing. . . . It would be a grave mistake to defend and protect those behavioral characteristics of black children that are incompatible with effective academic learning, or to perceive as cultural deracination any behavioral or cognitive-style changes that 25 could improve Black children’s school learning and performance. (I). 82) Sizemore (1985) analyzed why some schools have been successful in helping black and/or poor students reach high achievement. In her study of the research that has been done of schools that have been successful with minority children, several factors appeared, but one that is necessary is "the generation of a climate of high expectations for student achievement conducive to teaching and learning" (p. 271). The other factor that was important was "the denial of student placement in educable mentally retarded divisions unless all strategies for regular learning had been exhausted" (p. 272). 'These correlates are found in the research dealing with effective schools. Barnard defined efficient and effective as follows: "When a specific desired end is attained, we shall say that the action is effective" (p. 273). Also reported in the article was the observation that "the achievement of minority pupils depended more on the schools they attended than did the achievement of majority pupils." The effective schools research has shown that "black poor children can learn and can be taught" (p. 286). Keith and Page (1985) conducted a study to determine whether Catholic high schools improve minority students’ achievement. Data were analyzed to compare black and Hispanic high school seniors’ achievement in public and in Catholic schools. Controls were used for family and student background characteristics, such as parental education and possessions in the home. Results of the analyses suggested that Catholic schools do indeed have a meaningful effect on minority students’ achievement, "yet the analyses do not reveal 26 whether this apparent Catholic school effect is the spurious by- product of yet another uncontrolled selection variable, or whether these paths represent a true product of some aspect of Catholic schooling" (p. 345). In this study, after incorporating selection variables and school effects, it was found that "Catholic schools do indeed seem to have a real influence on minority high school seniors’ academic achievement, and that this effect is largely accomplished through the more stringent curricular demands of Catholic schools" (p. 345). The results must be interpreted with caution as the nfinority students’ previous achievement might have caused their selection into Catholic schools and therefore their current achievement, which could not be controlled in the study. After studying the work of several anthropologists who had tried to explain the differential achievement of minorities, Trueba (1988) concluded that: The lack of theoretical structure in dealing with knowledge acquisition forces cultural ecologists to speculate that "castelike" individuals develop a "castelike“ personality type; that is, they see themselves as inferior and the dominant population as superior, and this personality type explains why some children achieve higher than others. (p. 279) He further concluded that: Academic failure (n: success of children is not a personal attribute of any child, nor a collective characteristic of any ethnic group, but a social phenomenon linked to historical and social conditions. Furthermore, academic success is not a function of schools alone, but is conceptualized as a normal process that can be anticipated and pursued through appropriate steps and interventions across the multiple activity settings in which children are involved. (p. 282) 27 The Importance of Minority Teachersyps Role Models for Minority Students According in) Kortokrax-Clark (1986-87), blacks, Native Americans, Chicanos, Asians, and Puerto Ricans comprise the fastest- growing segments of the United States population. She said, "By 2020, the Black population will expand from 11.7 to 14 percent of the population and the Hispanic population will expand from 6.4 to 14.7 percent" (p. 7). The earning power of minorities has continued to lag behind that of' whites. Between 1972 and 1981, blacks averaged 52.6% of the white income, and Hispanics averaged 55.7% of the white income. Kortokrax-Clark believed that, not only do the low test scores of some minority candidates prevent them from entering the teaching ranks, but also that teaching offers them "too few extrinsic rewards" (p. 9). Academically talented minorities and women, who were once restricted to teaching as a professional option, are now choosing other occupations. Tewel and Trubowitz (1987) believed that the drop in the number of prospective minority teachers is part of the overall decline in interest in teaching and has also come about because teachers do not enjoy the high status and respect in the community they once did. The other factor is that: Seniority and tenure provisions won by teacher unions have also caused a loss of teaching positions held by minorities. During periods of enrollment decline and fiscal restraint, the first teachers dismissed are usually those with the least seniority. Minorities, often the last hired, are usually the first to be laid off. (p. 358) Since 1986, 23 of the 25 largest school systems in the United States have been dominated by minority students. By the year 2000, 28 one-third of the students in the public schools likely will be black or Hispanic, but only 11% of all teachers are now minorities; only 8% of all newly hired full-time teachers in 1986 were members of minority groups. Each year the pool of minority applicants is decreasing. Part of this situation may be explained, in part, by the fact that there are more alternative opportunities for careers for minorities than there were in the past. In states such as Louisiana, where teachers’ examinations are given, a large percentage of the black students who apply for teacher certification fail the tests. "In Florida, only 28%-32% of the black candidates passed all subtests on the state’s teacher certification test in 1984" (Bell & Morsink, 1986, p. 16). The American Association of School Personnel‘Administrators reported that, between 1976 and 1983, "the percentage of bachelor’s degrees in education awarded to blacks declined by 52%. The percentage of such degrees awarded to Hispanics climbed by only a fraction of a percent" (Russell, 1988, p. 3). In an article in the Urban Review, Marcoulides and Heck (1988) discussed the decreasing number of minority students who become teachers later in life. They believed the reason for the decreasing number was poor performance on standardized tests. They reviewed the history of this problem and discussed the post-Sputnik era, when there was a combination of "segregation and unequal access to curricular resources (through tracking), especially for disadvan- taged and minority students" (p. 127). They continued: 29 In California a standardized test called the California Basic Educational Skills Test was developed to measure teacher proficiency in the basic skill areas of reading, writing and mathematics. The test was listed both as an admission test and a certification test. Similar to the results in Florida, most of the applicants failing this test were also minorities. College enrollment figures for minority groups in general have decreased considerably in the last ten years, but even worse are the enrollment figures of Ininority students in teacher education programs. In 1984-85 the undergraduate enrollment of black students declined by 2.2% to 8.8% of the total undergraduate enrollment. . . . This outcome represents a serious threat to equality of educational opportunity, especially since it comes at a time when the demand for teachers who understand the diverse needs of an increasingly multicultural population is greatest. (pp. 128-129) In Hearne, Texas, where there was a 45% black student popula- tion and many single-female-parent families, it was decided that the school district needed to provide black male role models (Walker, 1988). The district hired several black male aides from the high school. Although there were no empirical data to back up the con- clusions, the program was deemed a success. The principal said, "This is one of the best things that has ever happened to our cam- pus. The presence of the high school students definitely has a very positive effect on our students" (p. 773). Also, the aides bene- fited and "a former aide graduated from high school and hopes to be employed by the school system in some capacity because ’working for the school makes you feel more responsible, and it makes you feel that you are doing something important’" (p. 773). Some other former aides were in college preparing to become teachers; they said that a major factor in their career choice was their experience as student aides. 30 In an article about the importance of minority teachers, Brooks (1987) wrote that, according to the National Education Association’s information "in ten years only 5 percent of the nation’s teachers will be minorities, even though more than one-third of the students will be minorities" (p. 238). One of the reasons Brooks believed this had happened was that women and minorities in the past were limited to just a few professions, including teaching, but now they have many other options open to them, with more opportunities for advancement. He concluded that, "faced with disturbing economic statuses and a lack of black males in the household, young black students receive little support from the home. The obvious answer to this problem is the child’s teacher" (p. 245). In a study that presented a quantitative synthesis of examiner- familiarity effects on Caucasian and minority students’ test performance, Fuchs and Fuchs (T989) discovered that, although "Caucasian students performed similarly in familiar and unfamiliar examiner conditions, Black and Hispanic children scored significantly and dramatically higher with familiar examiners" (p. 306). Although the investigation had interesting results, the design of the study had some flaws, which should cause some skepti- cism about the results. According to Flagg and Flagg (1988), "one theory accounting for the vast presence of Blacks in education in past years suggests that education was a safe field and it was considered an area where Blacks could enter and be accepted" (p. 315). 31 In a study conducted by Good, Sikes, and Brophy (1973), it was shown that: In studying the effects of a male teacher on the sex typing of kindergarten children it was found that the availability of a male model had no important effects on children of either sex. The authors concluded that there is no reason to suggest that female teachers will mishandle boys simply because they are female and that the presence of a male model per se is unlikely to have dramatic effects on children. (p. 85) In an article about culture and ethnicity of students, DeGruttola (1985) stated: Our experiences with linguistic minority children over the past fifteen years demonstrate in some sense how this dialect began to take shape when both bilingual and monolingual teachers were confronted with school administrators who neither understood the pedagogic needs of those children nor the methodology necessary for dual language and culture integration. Monolingual teachers had been brainwashed by the ’melting pot’ theory of sameness and assimilation into an Anglo value system, fraught with racial and ethnic prejudice, which permeated every aspect of life. . . . The students have realized that even after adapting, in some sense, to their new environment they have still, through a self-motivating effort, retained the essential qualities of their past experiences. (p. 63) The author implied that no learning can take place in the classroom unless there is some real connection between the subject as learner and the object in the environment. _gacher Expectations and Student Achievement As a result of his study, Cooper (1979) concluded that "although influences on student performance are multiple and complex, a synthesis of information leads in) the conclusion that teacher expectations often do play a role in student achievement" (p. 389). 32 The first major study about teacher expectations, and probably the~ most famous, was the "Pygmalion study" (Cooper, 1979). It involved an experimental manipulation of teacher expectations and an assessment of their effects on students’ 10 scores. Students in early grades for whom high teacher expectations had been induced showed significant gains in total IQ and reasoning IQ when compared to other students in the school. Although the study was strongly criticized (n1 methodological grounds, other researchers studying teacher expectations have reached the same conclusion, making the results much more acceptable. Brophy and Good (1970) conducted a study of the differential performance expectations for different children in four first-grade classrooms. 'The teachers demanded better performance from the children for' whom 'they had higher expectations and treated the children differently from those for whom they had lower expectations. They were more likely to praise the children for whom they had high expectations. Teachers gave more criticisms to the "lows" than to the "highs." The authors stated: While the data for child-initiated contacts showed strong expectancy group differences, the measures of teacher-initiated interactions were much more closely related to sex than to expectancy. Differences between the highs and the lows are in quality rather than quantity of interaction with the teacher. The data show that the teachers consistently favored the highs over the lows in demanding and reinforcing quality performance. Finally, the teachers failed to give any feedback whatever only 3.33% of the time when reacting to highs, while the corresponding figure for lows is 14.75%, a highly significant difference. (p. 369) Dusek and Joseph (1983) did a meta-analysis on the bases of teacher expectancies, including student attractiveness, conduct, 33 cumulative folder information, race, and social class. They hypothesized that teachers would hold differential expectancies for students differing on some characteristic. The data suggested that social class, and perhaps race, were potential bases for teacher expectancies. Dusek and Joseph examined 29 studies in which teacher expectancies were assessed as a function of the race of the child. Only 24 studies involving comparisons between black and white students were included in the meta-analysis. 0f the 24 retrieved studies, "11 resulted in teacher expectancies favoring white students, and 13 resulted in no expectancy effect. Approximately 54% of the white students were expected to out-perform the average black students" (p. 336). The results of these studies indicated that race was a significant factor in the formation of teacher expectancies. Black students and Mexican students were expected to perform less well than white students. Green, Cunningham, and Yanico (1986) reported on a study done with 40 black and 40 white female college students who rated counselors’ abilities; it; was found that the ratings were more positive for attractive than for unattractive counselors, regardless of subject or counselor race. Subjects’ ratings of confidence in the counselor’s ability to help with a variety of problems showed that black counselors were expected to be more helpful than white counselors. Black subjects, but not white subjects, saw attractive counselors as being more helpful than unattractive counselors. (p. 351) The authors offered the following explanation for these results: To the extent that subjects answered in terms of how helpful they thought the counselor might be to themselves, the higher 34 ratings that black subjects gave to black counselors may simply indicate the importance of racial similarity to initial degree of confidence in the counselor. (p. 351) In a study of the effects of ethnicity and gender on teachers’ expectations of junior high students, Clifton, Perry, and others (1986) found that "teachers’ expectations of 'their students are affected by the students’ ethnicity, sex, intellectual ability, and academic performance" (p. 58). The results, therefore, showed that teachers based their' expectations. on both ascribed and achieved criteria. The results implied that teachers were sensitive to the cultural values of their students in setting both their normative and cognitive expectations. Clifton et a1. wrote: Data were obtained from a survey of junior high school students and teachers in Winnipeg, Manitoba, a major, multi-ethnic Canadian city. Two questionnaires were used to obtain the data: One measured the teachers’ expectations of their homeroom students; the other measured the students’ demographic characteristics, abilities, performances, and expectations of themselves. The teachers’ expectations of students from six ethnic groups were examined. After controlling for the students’ socioeconomic status, intellectual ability, academic performance, and expectations, we found that their ethnicity and sex had an effect on their teachers’ expectations. This evidence suggests that teachers may use such ascribed characteristics in their evaluations of students. (p. 58) In "Self-Fulfilling Prophecies," Jussim (1986) reported on a theoretical review he conducted of self-fulfilling prophesy. He stated: The concept of self-fulfilling prophecies refers to situations in which one person’s expectations about a second person lead the second person to act in ways that confirm the person’s original expectation. When applied to classrooms, the concept refers to situations in which a teacher’s expectations about a student’s future achievement evoke from the student performance levels consistent with the teacher’s expectations. (p. 429) 35 Jussim found in the research that teachers do form impressions early in the year concerning what the students’ achievement level will be. Very little research has been done on testing the accuracy of teachers’ expectations on all available information. "Research has shown that people evaluate the same test performance differently, depending on whether they have been told the student is from an upper or lower class background" (Jussim, 1986, p. 432). Jussim (1986) discussed a study done by Allport, which showed that sometimes people "reconstruct" events to be consistent with their expectations. Allport showed subjects a picture of a black man in a business suit and a white man holding a razor. Later, when subjects were asked to describe the picture, many of them recalled the white man in a business suit and the black man holding the razor. Several pieces of research in social psychology have supported the notion that "perceived similarity of physical characteristics, socioeconomic background, and beliefs and values leads to liking and interpersonal attraction" (Jussim, 1986, p. 436). The author continued: The relationship between similarity and liking may provide insights into teachers’ differing emotional responses to different students. Because most teachers are white, middle class, and relatively articulate, 'hi many classes high- achieving students are perceived as more similar to teachers than are low-performing students. Students with similar characteristics will be liked more. Race, economic class, and speech style are three immediately available and salient cues in most social encounters. (p. 436) 36 Perceptions of similarity from the teacher to the student may influence the expectations and differential treatment in the following ways: (a) expectations lead teachers to perceive themselves as more similar to highs; (b) perceived similarity leads teachers to like highs more than lows; and (c) teachers provide a warmer and more supportive environment for those students whom they like more. (Jussim, 1986, p. 436) Jussim (1986) concluded that self-esteem may be an important factor in self-fulfilling prophecies. A teacher’s treatment may affect the self-esteem of students. hi a study undertaken to determine whether there was a: relationship between the match or mismatch of learning-style preferences of students and teachers, actual student achievement, and teachers’ expectations of student achievement, Jacobsen (1988) discovered that: The match or mismatch of student and teacher learning style preference, student gender, student age, student attitude toward school, and the student’s family structure did not contribute significantly. [However], teachers had higher expectations for Caucasian students than for Alaskan Native students and multiple regression showed that actual student achievement and student ethnicity contributed to the formation of teacher expectations of student achievement. (p. 49/08-A) Contreras (1985) conducted a study whose purpose was to investigate the relationship between teacher expectations of bilingual children and English reading achievement. She found that "high teacher expectations were significantly related to high English language proficiency and to teachers’ use of Spanish with students for whom they held low expectations" (p. 46/06-A). 37 Smith (1980) reported about. a study that was done to investigate the self-concept of 286 urban elementary school children in grades 3 through 6, in relationship to teachers’ expectations of academic achievement. Previous research showed that young children have a relatively unstable self-concept and that they react to the immediate situation rather than a real attitude toward themselves. Around the age of seven, the child "begins to shift his/her frame of reference from the home and family to the school, teacher, and classmates" (p. 78). The results of the study showed that "increases in teacher expectation of academic achievement are accompanied by an increase in self-concept or vice versa" (p. 81). As in some previous research, "the self-concept data followed the trend of no significant differences according to race" (p. 81). Henderson (1975) compared the climate of schools with mainly black students with the climate of schools with mostly white students. He found that: When students in black schools perceive that parents, teachers, and friends are assessing them lower and expect less of them than those attending white schools, performance is likely to follow expectations. Also, the higher mean factor score in black schools on Student Reported Sense of Futility is noteworthy. One aspect of this factor is the students’ perceptions of their efficacy within the social system. Another aspect is teachers’ and other students’ feelings of hopelessness or lack of caring about academic achievement within the school social system. (p. 397) St. John (1971) investigated the influence of teachers on the adjustment of children to interracial classrooms. Earlier research had shown that "teachers can have a great influence on minority group children, finding that white teachers perceived ghetto 38 children more negatively than did black teachers and that Negro pupils believed teachers to be more unfavorable to them than did white pupils or than their teachers themselves claimed to be" (p. 635). The result of the study was that child-oriented teachers thought well of the black pupils, but that task-oriented teachers did not. The strongest relationship for black pupils was that between teacher orientation to the child and growth in reading. Length of experience of the teacher did not influence growth. For blacks, kindliness, adaptability, and optimism were significant factors. The race of the teachers was not explored. Babad (1985) conducted a study in Israel about the correlates of teachers’ expectancy bias. Israeli elementary school teachers graded a handwritten worksheet allegedly written by an "excellent" or a "weak" student. In other studies cited by Babad, it had been shown that the difference in the "mean grades given to the excellent and weak children was greater for Moroccan than for the European child "(p. 176). In several studies cited, it was discovered that there was no relationship between teachers’ stereotyped ethnic bias and their own ethnic origin. But Babad went on to say, "In a paradoxical way it might well be that teachers of minority group origin are more biased than other teachers, only their special sensitivity to ethnic issues obliterated that bias from being manifested in the above-mentioned studies" (p. 176). Another interesting discovery that Babad made was that "biased subjects described themselves as more objective, unbiased, and reasonable than unbiased subjects" (p. 177). Of the 41 teachers in the sample, 39 38 responded to the (question about the success of school integration: "6 teachers believed that integration did not at all improve the academic achievement of disadvantaged students; 16 responded with moderate improvement; and 16 responded with very high improvement" (p. 181). On the basis of the analysis that was done, Babad concluded that "a clear relationship between expectancy bias and the intensity of the belief in the success of school integration was demonstrated" (p. 182). Williams (1976) investigated whether teachers engage in social class discrimination and base their expectations on students’ ascribed characteristics. In looking at the past research, he found little to support the idea that students’ social origins are an important source of teacher expectations. If teachers do engage in class bias, it is most likely to surface in the evaluation they themselves make of the students. Based on the data collected in the study, Williams concluded that: Teacher prophecies do not matter much where learning itself is concerned, but matter a great deal in the evaluation of this learning by teachers. . . . Teacher expectations have had their effect by the time students reach high school, exerting their greatest influence in the first years of schooling. (p. 233) Wong (1980) studied the expectations teachers have of Asian and white students. The achievements of Asian-American students have been spectacular. The purpose of the study was to investigate teachers’ perceptions of the social, emotional, and academic characteristics of Asian students. In 1980, "30.8 percent of the total Chinese male population as opposed to 14.4 percent of the 40 white population had completed four years of college or more" (p. 237). Wong discussed numerous studies in his paper and drew the following conclusion: [There was] a strong positive relationship between the students’ socioeconomic status, teachers’ educational expecta- tions, and later achievements; that is, the higher the socio- economic status of the student’s family, the higher is his/her academic achievement. (p. 238) The study findings showed that: Asian elementary students were seen as significantly more emotionally stable than were white elementary students. There were statistically significant differences in all of the measures of emotional stability; that is, Asian students were seen as more kind, obedient, disciplined, cooperative, patient, and less prone to anger than the white elementary students. Asian elementary students also were seen as significantly more academically competent than white elementary students. (p. 240) In 1970, Rist did an observational study of a class of ghetto children during their kindergarten, first-grade, and second-grade years. He showed how the kindergarten teacher placed the children in reading groups that "reflected the social class composition of the class, and how these groups persisted throughout the first several years" (p. 411). Rist concluded that the way in which the teacher behaved toward the various reading groups became an important influence on the children’s achievement. The development of expectations by the kindergarten teacher as to the differential academic potential and capability of any student was "significantly determined by a series of subjectively interpreted attributes and characteristics of that student" (p. 413). The teacher possessed "a roughly constructed ideal type as to what characteristics were necessary for any given student to achieve success both in the 41 public school and in ‘the larger society" (p. 414). The characteristics seemed to be related to social-class criteria. In addition, subjective evaluations were made of the students with the desired traits. The instructional patterns became rigid, and as the year moved on, the gap in the academic material between the two groups widened. Studies have shown that narrowing the range in a classroom or in a group does not affect the achievement of the students (Rist, 1970). With regard to kindergarten teachers, it has been found that children possessing the attributes that are highly desired in children by middle-class educated adults are the ones with the potential to be the fast learners. Rist concluded: The picture that emerges from this study is that the school strongly shares in the complicity of maintaining the organizational perpetuation of poverty and unequal opportunity. The teachers’ reliance on a mixed black-white educated middle class for their normative reference group appeared to contain assumptions of superiority over those of lower class and status positions. The thrust of the white students received higher teacher expectations than did the black students of the same social class; teacher expectations for the black female students in the upper- and middle-class students higher educational experience should be towards diversity, not homogeneity. It appears that the public school system not only mirrors the configurations of the larger society, but also significantly contributes to maintaining them. (p. 447) Smith (1980) studied the relationship between mothers’ and teachers’ expectations and children’s academic and behavioral performance. Major findings included the following: The effects of social class on mother and teacher expectations were significant. The teacher expectations for the ufinority students in the upper and middle classes were generally higher than were teacher expectations for their white counterparts, while the lower-class white students received higher teacher expectations than did the black students of the same social 42 class; and teacher expectations for the black female students in the upper and middle class were markedly higher than those for the black male students of the same social class. The closer the mother expectations were to the teacher expectations, the stronger the effects of expectations on child performance. (p. 41/07-A) In a dissertation study, Marcus (1988) discovered that: There was no significant difference between the reported perceptions of the black and white subjects in this study. The conclusion that was reached was that black and white fourth graders of similar achievement level do not perceive that their teachers treat them differently. (p. 50/Ol-A) After analyzing research that had been done on teacher expectations, Good (1982) cited 17 behaviors that sometimes indicate differential teacher treatment of high and low achievers. From the research, he concluded that: Some teachers treat students believed to in; less capable in ways that differ substantially from the ways they interact with high achievers. There is growing evidence that students are aware of differential teacher behavior and that certain practices have negative effects on students’ beliefs and achievement. (p. 31) Holmes (1986) said that, in 1985, black students in the Duval County Schools in Florida "earned mean scores on the Stanford achievement test [that] were only half as high as the scores of white students" (p. 38). hi ten years the school district successfully increased the scores of white students by 31.5% and the scores of black students by 88%. One of the elements of success was that the message was conveyed to all students, teachers, and community members that the school board wanted all children to learn and to become educated adults. Trujillo (1986) assessed professors’ academic expectations of minority students. She stated: 43 No difference [was] found between expectations of non- minorities and graduate minority students. However, the findings indicated that professors had significantly lower expectations of undergraduate minority students compared to non-minority students. (p. 640) The goal of a study done by Vollmer (1986) was to explain the relationship between expectancy and subsequent academic achievement. He stated that "a fundamental assumption irI all theories of achievement motivation is . . . that expectancy is an independent determinant of motivational activation which, in turn, influences quality of performance" (p. 65). One hundred ferty-five students taking an undergraduate psychology examination at the University of Bergen were studied. Measurements were taken in past achievement, self-confidence, work spent in preparing for the examination, expected grade, effort expended ‘hi the examination situation, and examination grades. A relationship between expectancy and perceived ability was found. Vollmer found that the expectation a student had for success did influence the outcome. In "Teacher Expectation: Implications for Achievement," Quzts (1986) stated: It is now commonly accepted that a teacher’s behavior can result in an expectancy effect when student performance confirms it teacher’s original predictions about a student. This performance is understood to have been determined by the teacher’s behavior. (p. 134) Quzts went on to discuss the work Larkin did in 1980, in which he concluded that "teachers. in schools. with lower expectations for black students and disadvantaged students convey these expectations to students in a variety of ways" (p. 136). Also, he believed 44 children are done a disservice when they are labeled in a certain way, such as culturally disadvantaged, because they may not achieve as much. Entwisle, Alexander, and others (1986) considered the self- expectations first-grade students have and how those expectations affect achievement. The researchers suspected beforehand that the eventual achievement of children "depended on their early level of achievement and on their conceptions of their own ability" (p. 590). The study findings showed that the children’s race had little effect on the level of teachers’ marks in integrated schools. Parents’ expectations had more numerous effects on children’s marks. In both the 1971-72 and 1982-83 samples, it appeared that: The observation flies in the face of speculations that when children start school their low self-images or negative expectations dampen performance. 'Hi the contrary, most children in these samples have positive ideas about themselves and there is little variability in their expectation levels across socioeconomic or racial boundaries. (p. 605) In the article "Teachers’ Communication of Differential Expectations for Children’s Classroom Performance," Brophy and Good (1970) reported the results of a study concerning the different ways teachers communicate differential performance expectations to different children. The differences were investigated through observational study of "dyadic contacts between teachers and individual students in four first-grade classrooms" (p. 365). Some of the differential teacher behavior that was observed was not attributable to objective differences among the children and was consistent with self-fulfilling prophecies. "The teachers demanded 45 better performance from those children for whom they had higher expectations and were more likely to praise such performance when it was elicited" (p. 367). During the observations, the source of the interaction was coded as to whether the interaction was initiated by the teacher or the child. The findings were as follows: While the data for child-initiated contacts showed strong expectancy group differences, the measures of teacher-initiated contacts were much more closely related to gender than to expectancy. Boys were higher than girls ("1 all measures of teacher-initiated contacts, significantly so for work-related interactions, behavioral criticisms, and total teacher-afforded response opportunities. Differences between the highs and the lows were in quality rather than quantity of interaction with the teacher. (p. 369) In "Pygmalion Grows Up: A Model for Expectation Communication and Performance Influence," Cooper (1979) discussed a study done by Clark in 1963. He stated: "Clark argued that some ghetto children might be the victims of low teacher expectations which became self- fulfilling prophecies. The fact that ghetto teachers believed their students could not learn was quickly verified" (p. 390). Bing and Morris (1985) found that children’s expectations were increased by their own success and the observed success of peers and were lowered by both direct and vicarious failure. They wrote: Lower-class black children were more influenced by same-race comparison others only after a relatively unexpected initial outcome, whereas middle-class white children showed a tendency to be more influenced by same-race others, regardless of their prior task experience. (p. 301) In the experiment, 75 black boys and 75 black girls were exposed to the outcomes of four children, two of whom were black and two white. The results from the first analysis were quite straightforward. Children’s expectations for success were responsive both to their own outcomes on a somewhat different task and to the 46 outcomes on the same task of same-sex and same-age peers. Boys were influenced more by same-race children after having failed initially, whereas initial success was the precondition which led girls to be more influenced by same-race peers. (p. 308) The most important finding from the study was that: Success, whether experienced directly ("1 a previous task, or vicariously by observing the outcomes of same-age, same-sex peers, leads to higher achievement expectations than does failure; this was found to be the case both for black, lower- class urban children and white, middle-class rural children. Black children became especially interested in comparison information only when an expectancy-disconfirming event increased uncertainty about their ability level. (p. 311) Brattesani, Weinstein, and Marshall (1984) found that, by observing the differential teacher treatment of high and low achievers, students acquire information about their abilities. The researchers found that "student perceptions of teacher structuring and reacting were more critical in influencing achievement than the observed teaching behaviors alone" (p. 236). Further, In classrooms where student reports indicate greater availability of differential achievement cues from the teacher, students perceive teacher treatment toward themselves that is congruent with the expectation that the teacher holds for them and congruent with student perceptions of differential treatment accorded to high and low achievers. . . . In such classrooms, the effects of teacher expectations on student expectations for achievement and on year end achievement itself are more pronounced. Students were not only aware of differential treatment of themselves but of peers, which also could influence individuals as the differentiation could be done along racial lines. (p. 245) In research he conducted in Canada, Clifton (1981) examined the extent to which differences in achievement between German-speaking and French-speaking students were influenced by the expectations of teachers. The goal in the study was to investigate the extent to which speak where othEI 1110 Edit were Germ that afte but rath stat heh; IEAI to the 47 which ethnicity of students shaped teacher expectations. Yiddish- speaking students’ achievement was higher than that of other groups, whereas French-speaking students were substantially lower than the other' groups. "The differences between the ethnic groups were maintained even when size of community, father’s and mother’s education, father’s occupation, and number of children in the family were controlled" (p. 292). Teachers had higher expectations for the German students than the French students; however, the conclusion that emerged from the study was that the "teachers’ expectations do affect both assigned grades and standardized achievement measures but the effects are from past performance and intellectual ability rather than from ethnicity or, for that matter, from socioeconomic status" (p. 298). Roberts, Hutton, and Plata (1985) asked teachers 11) rate the behavior of Hispanic, black, and Anglo elementary students with the Teacher Checklist of School Behavior. The purpose of the study was to compare the teacher ratings. The result was that the behavior of Hispanic students was rated less favorably than that of either of the other two groups. Further, Hispanic students have been observed to demonstrate fewer learning and motivational behaviors and, therefore, may be perceived to more frequently exhibit avoidance of teacher and peer' interactions. Differential teacher ratings of student behavior may lead to over- or under-representation of Hispanic students in special education. (p. 355) Researchers have shown that boys and girls differ in their classroom behavior and achievement. Many studies have been done in this area. Good at al. (1973) found that "male and female teachers 48 behave differently in some ways, although they show similar patterns in their treatment of boys and girls" (p. 74). Further, they found that "low-achieving boys, relative to other students, received the poorest contact patterns with both male and female teachers" (p. 74). Although the authors did not specifically study differences in treatment of students of various races, the research could have implications for the present study. Feldman and Theiss (1982) examined the joint effects of teachers’ expectations about students and students’ expectations about teachers on the performance and attitudes of both partici- pants. The results indicated that: Both teachers and students can concurrently hold expectations about their partner and that such expectations affect attitudes about themselves, the partner, and the entire teaching situation. There is evidence that such expectations can be transmitted to one’s partner, independent of the partner’s expectation. It is thus clear that teacher-student interaction is a complicated phenomenon, with both parties acting as Pygmalions in the classroom. (p. 223) The purpose of a study by Cecil (1988) was to determine whether the expectations that teachers held for black children who spoke Black dialect would differ significantly from the expectations held for black children who spoke Standard English. An interesting implication of the findings was that most teachers thought they did deal equitably with all children. However, Cecil found that the teachers surveyed "expected significantly greater overall academic achievement, reading success, and intelligence from those children who spoke Standard English than from those who spoke Black dialect" (p. 34). 49 In 1981, the Interim Report of the Rampton Committee claimed that "unintentional racism is widespread within the teaching profession and contributes, via the self-fulfilling prophecy, to the relative academic failure of West Indian children" (Short, 1982, p. 95). A study done by Green was cited in the report. Green worked with teachers of children between 7 and 13 years of age and was interested in how the 12 most ethnocentric teachers differed from the 12 least ethnocentric teachers in terms of their behavior toward English, Asian, and West Indian children. The most ethnocentric teachers gave the West Indian children less than their fair share of individual attention, and the least ethnocentric teachers gave the West Indian children a disprOportionate amount of their time. In a study by Scarr, it was found that West Indian children performed as well as any other racial group when they entered school initially, but by the age of seven they started to fall behind. The paper explored an account of West Indian school performance in terms of the self-fulfilling prophecy and found "no conclusive evidence to confirm the allegation that many teachers, as a result of their socialization, subscribe to negative stereotypes of West Indian children, or that they respond to these children in ways that convey a negative stereotype" (p. 100). As early as 1966, Coleman (cited in Finn, Gaier, & others, 1975) observed that poor children come to school with disadvantages not connected to the school, but the schools provide additional serious disadvantages directly connected to the inadequacies of the school system. One of these disadvantages was negative teacher 50 expectations--expectations by the very people responsible for the child’s success, the child’s learning, and the child’s sense of adequacy in school. Finn, Brophy, and Good (cited in Finn et al., 1975) claimed that "there is strong evidence that the teacher’s behavior toward specific children is related to differential expectancies" (p. 177). In a summary of expectations research, Baker, Crist, Finn, and Peng (cited in Finn et al., 1975) concluded that "experimentally induced teacher expectations are not as likely to affect pupil performance as are natural expectations. These are expectancies formed by teachers after a review of the pupils’ credentials and actual interaction with the pupils" (p. 178). Finn, Gaier, Peng, and Banks (cited in Finn et al., 1975) conducted a study to test teachers’ expectations as they pertained to the class as a whole. To test the effect of pupils’ race on teachers’ expectations, the eight mixed classes were eliminated, and mean expectation differences were tested between the six teachers in all-black schools and the eight teachers in all-white schools. The finding was that "there is no significant difference in expectations between teachers in all-black and in all-white schools." Even though class expectations did not correlate significantly with the racial variable, teachers "may set their expectations relative to the particular school and setting" (p. 193). Henderson (1975) studied the problem of the low rate of academic success among Puerto Ricans, American Indians, Mexican 51 Americans, and blacks. Although the rate of success of these groups overall is lower than that of white students, it is possible to find black. schools. with high achievement and white schools- with low achievement. Henderson looked at school climate as a factor. The study that was done was designed to "compare the school normative climate of“ white and black urban elementary schools relatively matched on socioeconomic status and achievement" (p. 383). A variable that contributed heavily to the significant multivariate test of Variable Group A was teacher press for competition. Black schools scored highest on this scale, which might mean that students in black schools perceived the teachers to emphasize competition among the students. The perceived teacher expectations and evaluations scale was also significant in the infivariate testing. Black schools scored highest on this scale, which is used to measure the self-fulfilling-prophecy phenomenon in regard to achievement. Some of the achievement differential between white and black schools was as follows: 1. When students in black schools perceived that parents, teachers, and friends were assessing them lower and expected less of them than those attending white schools, performance was likely to follow expectations. 2. The higher mean factor score in black schools on student reported sense of fhtility is noteworthy; One aspect of this factor is the students’ perceptions of their efficacy within the social system. Another aspect is teachers’ and other students’ feelings of hopelessness or lack of caring about academic achievement within the school social system. (p. 396) In a study done in a parochial grade school, teachers evaluated pictures of two boys previously identified as Hispanic lower class, 52 Hispanic middle class, white lower class, and white middle class based on physical appearance (McCombs & Gay, 1988). Initially, race and social class affected teachers’ judgments. However, after receiving information about ID, the teachers reevaluated the pictures. Social class was no longer a factor, but race still influenced teachers’ judgments to the extent that the high-IQ Hispanic child, regardless of perceived social class, was evaluated less positively than the high-IQ white child. In the initial sorting of students, "45% of the teachers said they used physical appearance to make their judgments; they acted as though they believed appearance is a valid predictor of ability" (McCombs & Gay, 1988, p. 650). Braun (1976) cited a study done by Pippert in which it was discovered that "if the teacher believes in some pupils, his belief will be related to the gains of the other pupils under the teacher’s care" (p. 190). Kehle (cited in Braun, 1976) also concluded in a 1974 study that single variables such as gender, race, and attrac- tiveness, in isolation, do not account for the variable expectations teachers hold for children. Physical appearance, however, seemed to head the list in influencing the expectations about achievement that teachers have of students. Braun also stated that "several studies have shown that race and social class differences lead to different assignment of personality traits or stereotypes" (p. 193). Cooper, Baron, and Lowe (1975) investigated the academic expectations of introductory psychology and elementary education students on the basis of their knowledge of race and social class. 53 The results showed that middle-class students were expected to receive higher grades than lower-class students and that white middle-class students were held more internally responsible for failure than any other student type. "The middle-class black student was seen as potentially as academically successful as his white counterpart. He was also seen as less responsible for failure" (p. 316). In a study done in Texas, teachers rated the behavior of Hispanic, black, and Anglo elementary school students with the Teacher Checklist of School Behavior (Roberts et al., 1985). The authors discovered that: The behavior of Hispanic students was rated less favorably than that of either of the other two groups. The Hispanic students were perceived to avoid peer and teacher interaction to a greater extent than Anglo and black students and to exhibit more physical reaction (absenteeism, physical complaints, clinic request, etc.). It also appears that Hispanic students §g§)less competitive than either black or Anglo students. (p. Roberts et al. did not mention whether there was a difference in how minority teachers rated minority students. Gaite (cited in Braun, 1976) suggested that teachers’ expecta- tions have to be viewed in relation to the opinions already held by individual teachers. He believed that "if teacher expectancy really does influence pupil performance then it probably only does so when the expectancy is fairly massive, all-embracing, and is a consistent part of a set of opinions and beliefs held by the teacher" (p. 196). In various studies, teachers were more likely to accept poor performance from low-expectation children and less likely to praise 54 good performance of these same children even though it occurred less frequently. Gergen (cited in Braun, 1976) supported the view that children will accept orientations about themselves in accordance with the way in which significant others around them behave toward them. Also, Videbeck (cited in Braun, 1976) found that appraisal from others determines the conception people have of themselves. Several researchers have shown that "persons are tgenerally unwilling to accept evidence that they are better or worse than they themselves have decided" (Braun, 1976, p. 207). Cooper and Tom (1984) examined the effects of teacher expectations and how generally the effects occur. They examined several types of expectations: estimates of present ability or achievement, expected improvement, discrepancies between teachers and tests, and self-fulfilling prophecies. In a review of the expectation literature done by Rosenthal, 112 studies were found in which the expectation effect was tested in everyday situations. Of these studies, "about 40% produced reliable statistical differences indicating that teacher self-fulfilling prophecies exist" (Cooper & Tom, 1984, p. 79). In 1980, Smith found that teacher expectations had a much stronger effect on reading achievement than on math achievement or student 10. There is little research support for the notion that "severely inaccurate teacher expectations can substantially alter student performance" (p. 79). In summary, the research evidence has suggested that: 55 (a) teacher expectation effects are most likely to occur in subject areas that allow the greatest variation in instructional styles; (b) some instructional behaviors are more likely to produce expectation effects than others; (c) severe self-fulfilling prophecies rarely occur in classrooms but mild self-fulfilling prophecies and sustaining expectation effects are matters for concern; and (d) teacher expectations are primarily determined by the actual ability and motivation levels of students. (Cooper & Tom, 1984, p. 80) Another interesting sidelight of the article was that "in evaluating lows, some teachers may tend not to praise strong performance because praise will reduce their future personal control" (p. 84). Studies of individual differences among teachers have revealed that "teachers with more dogmatic personalities are more likely to produce expectation effects" (Cooper & Tom, 1984, p. 85). Good (1981) asked first-grade teachers to rank their students according to their academic achievement and observed the interaction patterns with several students who *were either high or low on teachers’ ranking lists. The results indicated these teachers provided more response opportunities to high-achieving students than to low-achieving students. Good said that teachers’ expectations seemed to have a greater influence in the primary grades, when "students still accept the authority of the teacher’s role and are not yet fully aware of their own power to influence" (p. 417). The studies have shown consistently that "individual teachers vary greatly in their behavior toward high- and low-achieving students and groups" (p. 418). Brophy (cited in Good, 1981) found that successful teachers (those who obtained better-than-expected achievement gains from students) had belief systems that reflected 56 positive attitudes that they could teach and that students could learn. A study was done in 1967 about the stereotypes of ten nationality and ethnic groups (Karlins, Coffman, & Walters, 1969). A comparison was made of a similar study done in 1933 and again in 1951. The study was done at Princeton. One of the factors that affected the student was that Princeton students were no longer a preponderance of well-to-do, privileged youths. What was found was that "the most dramatic and consistent trend over the 25-year period has been the more favorable characterization of the Negro" (p. 8). It also was discovered in the study and from work of previous researchers that "the degree of agreement in stereotyping a particular group of people was not related to the degree of prejudice toward that group" (p. 12). In summarizing, Karlins et al. stated that: The apparent "fading" of social stereotypes in 1951 is not upheld as a genuine overall trend. While traditional assignments have declined in frequency they have, in the long run, been replaced by others, resulting in restored stereotype uniformity. . . . line results suggest 'that students possess stereotypes even though they may not often make use of them or feel that their judgments are affected by them. (p. 14) Berger, Cohen, and Zelditch (1972) discussed the literature on status organization processes in decision-making groups whose members differed in external status. They found that "status characteristics such as age, sex, and race determine the distribution of participation, influence, and prestige among members of such groups" (p. 241). In some studies that were cited, for example, "in .juries, sex and occupation determine participation, 57 election to foreman, and evaluation of juror competence" (p. 242). And "in biracial work groups whites initiate more interactions than blacks, talk more to other whites than blacks, and even blacks talk more to whites than other blacks" (p. 242). Berger et al. stated that status assumptions appear to be of two kinds: "those dealing with specific abilities relevant 'hi the interaction situation and those dealing with generally useful capacities" (p. 242). Further, some evidence has indicated that categories like age, sex, occupation, education, and race are larger factors when the group has not had a long history of interaction as a group. Berger et al. (1972) assumed that "performance expectations have a one-to-one relation to beliefs about task ability. Those high in ability will be expected to perform well, those low, to perform poorly" (p. 246). In summary, it was found that "different evaluations, different specific expectations and different general expectations are associated with the states of status characteris- tics" (p. 253-254). According to Leder (1987): Previous studies have reported that teachers tend to engage in more interactions with high achieving and high expectation students than with other student groups. The study replicated these findings for a grade 6 sample, with the consistency of results adding weight to their importance. Data pertaining to a grade 3 sample, however, showed considerable variability and therefore failed to support previous studies. (p. 139) It is important to consider that "most men and women entering ttie teaching profession are themselves members of the middle class, wfiich, regardless of its own ethnicity, often finds it difficult to 58 fathom the problems and needs that lower socio-economic children bring with them to school" (p. 20). Most teachers also do not speak any language but English; do not have numerous relationships with people of other races, cultures, or religions; and have rarely been instructed by anything but an Anglo-centric curriculum. Santos (1986) also believed that: Clarification of one’s own cultural identity and feeling toward other cultures should be an integral part of any professional preparation effort. In addition, teachers should be encouraged to create an atmosphere of open acceptance of all feelings, thoughts, and points of view, regardless of whether or not these are in accord with their own. (p. 22) The purpose of a study done by Cherry (1987) was to investigate students’ perceptions of teachers’ behaviors toward their students, which can be a result of their academic expectations. Significant results showed that "students perceived that teachers gave more negative feedback and teacher direction to low achievers than they did to high achievers, and non-Anglo, compared to Anglo, students perceived that teachers demonstrated significantly less amounts of high teacher expectations" (p. 48/12-A) Analysis of the results of a study conducted in St. Louis showed that "black teacher respondents, in general, held higher expectations for their students’ overall academic achievement than did their white counterparts" (Bailey, 1988, p. 49/07-A). Rist (1970) observed in group of children in kindergarten, first grade, and second grade in an attempt to discover how teacher expectations are formed. He concluded that, "within a few days, only a certain group of children were continually being called on to 59 lead the class in the Pledge of Allegiance, read the weather calendar, participate in show and tell, etc." (p. 419). In a study reported in the Journal of Personality and Social Psycholoqy, Rubovits and Maehr (1973) observed teachers following the manipulation of an expectancy regarding student potential. The authors found that, in addition to the teachers giving preferential treatment to gifted students, this pattern of treatment . . depended to some extent on the race of students. In general, black students were treated less positively than whites, with blacks labeled gifted apparently subjected to more discrimination 'than ‘those 'labeled "non-gifted." . . . The organismic variable of dogmatism was found to play an important role in moderating teacher behavior in response to black students and white students. High-dogmatic teachers, while encouraging whites, tended to ignore blacks. (p. 213) In a study about Mexican American students based (N1 classroom observations, "Mexican American students experienced more interaction with the teacher than Anglos in only two areas--giving directions and criticizing. In all positive categories, the Anglos experienced more interaction." Willianl Raspberry (1990), syndicated columnist for the Washington Post, made the following statement, which appeared in the Hillsdale College newspaper: Black youngsters in the inner cities are moved by the myth that blacks have special athletic gifts, particularly with regard to basketball. Asian youngsters are influenced by the myth that they have special gifts for math and science. Jewish youngsters accept the myth that their group has a special gift for the power of the written word. Not all these myths are, by themselves, worthless. But when they evoke a sense of identity and the energy to move ahead something happens. People work at the things they believe they are innately capable of achieving. 60 So it is not uncommon to see a black kid working up to bedtime, practicing his double—pump scoop, his behind-the-back dribble, his left-handed jump shot. And after a few months of work, if he has any athletic talent at all, he proves the myth. The myth that blacks cannot prevail in intellectual competi- tion, that Chinese youngsters cannot play basketball, that Jews are especially vulnerable to guilt trips--these are negative myths whose acceptance has led to failure because they feed the assumption that failure is inevitable. Objective reality is the arena in which we all must perform. But the success or failure of our performance is profoundly influenced by the attitudes--the myths--we bring to that reality. (pp. 1-2) In a commentary written by R. Richard Banks in Education Week, he stated, The focus of trying desperately to attract minorities to teaching implies that black students, for example, can be educated only, or at least best, by black teachers--a view that releases non-minority teachers from their responsibility. As an integral element of teacher-education programs, all teachers should be trained to teach students of different cultures, socioeconomic levels, and abilities. The importance of such skills must be reflected in the standard by which teachers are certified and evaluated. (p. 21) . CHAPTER III DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY Introduction This chapter contains a discussion of the research sample, the design of the study, the hypotheses and subhypotheses, the instru- ment used, and the data-analysis procedures. The Research Samplg To determine whether' minority and white teachers rate the potential achievement of minority and white students differently, it was imperative: to find situations in which there were minority teachers and students. It was also best to seek teaming situations where several teachers would be rating the students. The elementary level was not used extensively as a source because most elementary classrooms are self-contained, with one teacher responsible for a core group of children. At the high school level, subjects and teachers are separated, and although some of the teachers have the same students, the interaction is limited. It also did not make sense to involve later high school teachers in the prediction of the achievement in a short time period. Therefore, middle schools with a basic team approach structure for the most part were chosen for the study. Teams in which the teachers were rating the same set of students presented a situation 61 62 in which additional variables were eliminated that would be present if the teachers were rating different students. A random sample of 15 students was chosen from students who were assigned in teams. Teams were chosen who had minority teachers and minority students. Twenty-four teachers rated the potential overall achievement of a random sample of students on their teams. Five summer school teachers rated the potential overall achievement of the students they were teaching at summer schools. Three school districts in Michigan were used in the study: Waverly Community Schools, Mount Clemens Schools, and Flint Schools. Waverly Community Schools is a suburban school district located on the west side of Lansing. The district boundaries encompass portions of Watertown, Windsor, Lansing, and Delta Townships, as well as a small portion of the city of Lansing. There are approximately 3,400 students in the district, with a teaching staff of 232. There is a growing population of minority students, which is about 17%. Five percent of the teaching staff are minorities. Waverly Middle School was used for the project. The belief that has been established by the school district is: We, of the Waverly community, believe that all people are important as individuals and are to be treated with respect, dignity, and fairness. All individuals merit being heard and understood and deserve community support to develop their abilities. Personal development is best fostered in an atmosphere of caring and mutual trust, where diversity is recognized and valued. We firmly believe that the Middle School exists to provide opportunities for individuals to nmximize their potential and become more competent and committed contributors to society. 63 Four groups of teachers in the school district were asked to complete the questionnaire. Two of the groups worked at Waverly Middle School during the regular school year. One of those two groups taught a team of seventh graders and consisted of two white teachers and one black teacher. The other team was a special education team consisting of one black teacher and two white teachers. Also asked to rate the same group of youngsters were a white foreign language integrator' who worked with that team of children, as well as a black physical education teacher and a white physical education teacher. Summer school teachers working at Waverly Middle School also were asked to rate the potential achievement of the students they had in class. Two black teachers and two white teachers were asked to complete the prediction questionnaire. Because very few of the teachers had students in common in the summer school team, the statistics done on this part of the research could only be used in the general analysis. Eight teams of teachers were involved in the project. Each of the eight teams is described in the following paragraphs. Team 1 from the Waverly Middle School summer school program was rated by a black teacher and a white teacher. Both summer school teachers rated 15 beginning high school students. Both teachers rated three minority students. Another black teacher who taught beginning high school students and middle school students rated only two minority students that the other two teachers rated. None of the three teachers rated all of the minority students. 64 Team 2 consisted of two teachers--one white and one black--who predicted the achievement level of middle school students they were teaching in their summer school classes. The white teacher rated 15 students; four of them were minority. The black teacher rated 10 students, the total number he had in class; of these students, three were minority. The third teacher, who had middle school and begin- ning high school students, did not rate any of the same middle school minority students that the other two teachers had rated. Team 3 consisted of three basic-block middle school teachers from Waverly Middle School. The two white teachers and one black teacher rated the same 15 randomly selected students from their team. Seven minority children were rated by the three teachers. Team 4 also worked at Waverly Middle School and included six teachers, all working with the same 14 special education students who were not randomly selected. Three of the children in the group were minority children. Washington School in Mount Clemens, Michigan, was selected as the next site. The community of Mount Clemens is 16 miles northeast of Detroit, near Lake St. Clair. The school district is approximately four Iniles square and includes the City of’ Mount Clemens, a portion of Clinton Township, and Selfridge Air National Guard Base. Mount Clemens has a diverse population of approximately 27,000 people. The district serves a kindergarten through twelfth- grade enrollment of 3,300 students. There is a 37% minority student population in the district and a minority teacher population of 18%. 65 In a recent brochure distributed by the district, the mission of the district is stated as follows: The mission of the Mount Clemens Community School District is to teach all of its students, taking them to their highest educational potential, in a stimulating learning environment that equips students with essential academic and social skills, promotes self-worth, develops responsible citizens and prepares them for a productive future. Team 5 was a fifth-grade team at Washington School. The team consisted of five teachers, two white and three black. They rated 15 randomly selected fifth graders whom they taught as a team; five of the students were black. The third school district that was used in the study was the Flint School District. Flint is a large metropolitan school district in the eastern part of Michigan. There are more than 27,000 students in the district; of those students, 70.1% are minority and the teaching staff is 40.23% minority, the largest proportion being black. McKinley Middle School was used for the site of the study in Flint. The mission statement of McKinley Middle School, as stated in their recent annual report, is as follows: The faculty and staff of McKinley Middle School believe that all students will learn and achieve at their level of ability regardless of socio-economic status, race, religion, color or gender. We feel the purpose of the school is to educate all pupils to achieve their highest level of academic performance. At the same time this education must foster socially acceptable behaviors and attitudes. We accept the responsibility to teach all students, so that they can grow up to be educated and productive citizens. Team 6 was a four-teacher team consisting of two white teachers and two black teachers. They predicted the achievement level of 15 randomly selected students, six of whom were minority students. 66 The seventh team, also at McKinley, consisted of four teachers. Three of the teachers were white, and one was black. They rated the potential achievement level of 15 students, seven of whom were minority. Team 8 also was located at McKinley Middle School. It consisted of a four-teacher team, but one teacher was having surgery and was not able to participate and another did not return the questionnaire. Therefore, only two teachers in that group, one white and one black, completed the prediction of the future achieve- ment of 15 randomly selected students. Four of the students in the group were minority. Hypothesis and Subhypotheses The hypothesis of this study was as follows: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of white and minority students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. Subhypotheses were formulated for each of the four groups (Team 3, Team 5, Team 6, and Team 7) and for the total group. The sub- hypotheses are as follows: Hypothesis 1a: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of all of the students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. Hypothesis 1b: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of’ white students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. Hypothesis lc: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of minority students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. 67 Hyppthasis Id: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of white male students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. Hypothesis 1e: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of minority male students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. H at ei f: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of white female students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. Hypothesis 19: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of’ minority female students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. Hypothesis 1h: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of boys only, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. Hypothesis 1i: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of girls only, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. Instrument and Procedure Before individual teams of teachers were approached to complete the questionnaire, the researcher met with the principals of the schools involved in the study at Waverly and Flint and with the assistant superintendent for instruction in Mount Clemens. The purpose of the study was explained, and the participants were given a brief explanation of the study as follows: The idea of the study is to see if there is a difference in expectations that minority and white teachers have for minority and white students. I would need a secretary to give me class lists so that I can randomly select 15 students for each teacher to predict the achievement level. It would help if the teachers were in teams, or they might not be familiar with some of the students on the list; the middle school level, therefore, would be the most feasible. Each teacher will simply be asked to predict the success level of each of the 15 68 students--will not graduate from high school, will graduate with C’s and D’s, will be an average student, will be a top student, will be a college graduate (yes or no). It should take approximately 5 minutes for the teacher to complete the task. At Waverly Middle School, the researcher was given class lists for the teams and randomly selected the students, being careful to include some minority students. There were only two teams in the school with minority teachers, and that is why they were selected. The researcher met with one team after school and explained the questionnaire. The researcher met with the individuals of the other teams at various times. In Flint and Mount Clemens, after the researcher had explained the project, the assistant superintendent and principal took the responsibility for selecting the students to be rated, placing their names on the questionnaires, meeting with the team teachers, and collecting the questionnaires. The teachers were given the following letter of explanation before they completed the questionnaire: To the teacher: The research project I am asking you to participate in is a research project about the prediction of the future achievement of middle school/junior high school students. It has been approved through the district research department. Your participation is voluntary. Please put your name and building at the top of the attached form. Please rate each randomly selected student. on ,your team {according to the achievement level you feel he/she will reach at the high school or college level. Select one of four categories for each student--will not graduate from high school, will graduate from high school with C’s and D’s, average high school student, or top high school student. For each student not rated will not graduate, write yes or no if you think he/she will graduate from a four- year college program. Peggy Starr 69 The teachers were asked on the form to rate the potential achievement of students on the prewritten list. The teachers were unaware that race was going to be studied as part of their response. Therefore, the race of the students was not added to the response sheets until after they had been completed by the teachers. Research Design The average response for each teacher was calculated for each of the five categories they could choose for the potential achievement level of each of the students they rated. At a significance level of .05, a chi-square analysis was done for each of the choices. For this part of the analysis, the responses were used only for the teams of teachers that rated five or more minority students. Four teams met this criterion. For numbers smaller than that, it did not make sense to calculate an average. This same difference in the responses was also calculated for white teachers/ white students, white teachers/minority students, minority teachers/ white students, and minority teachers/minority students. The significance was also calculated for male teachers/female white students and female minority students and male teachers/male white students and male minority students; the same was done for female teachers/female» white students and female Ininority students and female teachers/male white students and male minority students. This same chi-square analysis was done at a significance level of .05 for each of the five categories of teacher responses for the overall average of the 135 students who were rated. 70 Summary The potential achievement level of 136 students was predicted by 29 teachers in 3 school districts. Eight teams of students were used in the study, and four of the teams met the criterion of having five or more of the same nfinority students rated by nfinority and white team teachers. A chi-square analysis was performed, using the Pearson product-moment method of calculating correlations for each of the four teams as well as the total group in the categories previously described. An analysis of the data collected in this study is presented in Chapter IV. CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS OF THE DATA This chapter contains an analysis of the data collected to fulfill the test for the hypothesis of the study: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of white and minority students, there will be no significant difference at the .05 level of significance. A questionnaire was completed by 29 teachers in three school districts in Michigan. The questionnaire had a preselected list of students’ names on it, and the teachers were asked to predict the achievement level in high school of the students on the list. The teachers had their own ideas of how well the students were already doing in school, which, of course, would influence the predictions they made of these students’ achievement later in their school careers. Eight different teams of teachers were found that had a representation on them of white and minority teachers and white and minority students. Teams of teachers were used because they would be rating the same students, thereby eliminating the factor of actual achievement differentiation in students. The statistics of four of the teams were used because more than five of the same minority students were rated by more than two teachers, which was 71 72 the criterion set up for the analysis. The Pearson product-moment test of correlation was used at the .05 level of significance. Frequency Distribution Twenty-nine teachers rated 136 students and could select one or two responses for the fUture expected success. If they selected "will not graduate from high school" on the questionnaire and they did not answer the question of whether the student would graduate from college, the researcher assumed that the response for that question was "No." Some teachers did not complete the section of the questionnaire that asked whether they thought the students would graduate from college. The frequency for the variables identified in the study-- teacher race, student race, student gender, and rating score--were as follows: There were 226 responses from white teachers (55.9%) and 178 responses from minority teachers (44.1%), for a total of 404; there were no missing cases. There was a frequency of 262 white student responses (64.9%), 119 black student responses (29.5%), 22 Hispanic student responses (5.4%), and 1 Asian student response (.2%), for a total of 404 with no missing cases. The last response was eliminated as a factor because minority in this study was defined as Hispanic or black. There were 234 male student responses (57.9%) and 170 female student responses (42.1%), for a total of 404 with no missing cases. The frequencies for* the specified ratings. were as follows: twill not graduate from high school (50 responses or 12.4%), will 73 graduate with C’s and 0’5 (129 responses or 31.9%), average student in high school (147 responses or 36.4%), and top student in high school (73 responses or 18.1%); there were five missing cases (1.2%). The frequencies of responses for whether the students would graduate from college were as follows: 193 responses (47.8%) for no and 163 responses (40.3%) for yes; there were 48 missing cases (11.9%). Results of the Hypothesis Testing Using a chi-square Pearson product-moment correlation procedure, an analysis was done of the responses of four teams who met the criterion of rating commonly at least five minority students so that a rational argument could be made for finding the average response. This test is often used in comparative studies, particularly when the research data are in the form of frequency counts. The frequency counts can be placed into two or more categories. The chi-square test is useful when the traits or characteristics being considered are actually continuous variables that have been categorized. However, it is also often used when the categories into which frequencies fall are discrete rather than continuous. 1T1 this. project the categories that teachers could predict the students would be in were continuous but were not interval; that is, there was not EH1 equal difference between the categories. Results of the hypothesis tests for the four teams who met the criterion of having more than five minority students rated by more 74 than two teachers are presented in this section. In the following pages, each of the eight subhypotheses is restated, followed by the results for that subhypothesis. 193m; Team 3 consisted of three seventh-grade basic-block middle school teachers from Waverly Middle School in Lansing, Michigan. There were two white teachers and one black teacher rating the same 15 randomly selected students from their team. Eight white and seven minority students were rated by the three teachers. Hypothesis la: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of all of the students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. As shown in Table 1, the white teachers said that 16.7% of the students would not graduate, whereas the minority teacher said that 6.7% of the students would not graduate. The white teachers thought 23.3% of the students would graduate with C’s and D’s, whereas the minority teacher predicted that 20% of the students would graduate with C’s and 0’s. The white teachers thought that 33.3% of the students. would be .average students in high school, whereas the minority teacher rated 40% of the students in this category. Finally, the white teachers thought that 26.7% of the students would be top students in high school, and the minority teacher rated 33.3% of the students this way. The result of the correlation test of the responses showed no significant difference. Thus, the null hypothe- sis was not rejected for this comparison. 75 Table l.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race--all students on the team: Team 3. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority -————————- -————————— -————————- No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. 5 16.7 1 6.7 6 13.3 Will graduate--C’s and 0’s 7 23.3 3 20.0 10 22.2 Average student in h.s. 10 33.3 6 40.0 16 35.6 Top student in h.s. 8 26.7 5 33.3 13 28.9 Column total 30 66.7 15 33.3 45 100.0 Chi-square = 1.07885 df = 3 Significance = .78218 Hypothesis 1b: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of’ white students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. As shown in Table 2, the white teachers and the minority teacher both predicted that 12.5% of the white students would not graduate from high school. The white teachers thought that 18.8% of the white students would graduate with C’s and 0’s, and the minority teacher thought 12.5% of the white students would be in this category. The white teachers said that 31.3% of the white students would be average, whereas the minority teacher rated 37.5% of the white students in this category. Finally, the white teachers and the minority teacher both predicted that 37.5% of the white students would be top students in high school. The results of the correlation test showed no significant difference. Thus, the null hypothesis for this comparison was not rejected. 76 Table 2.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race--white students only: Team 3. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority ————————— ————————— No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. 2 12.5 1 12.5 3 12.5 Will graduate--C’s and 0’s 3 18.8 1 12.5 4 16.7 Average student in h.s. 5 31.3 3 37.5 8 33.3 Top‘student in h.s. 6 37.5 3 37.5 9 37.5 Column total 16 66.7 8 33.3 24 100.0 Chi-square = .18750 df = 3 Significance = .97958 Hypothesis 1c: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of minority students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The white teachers responded that 21.4% of the nfinority students would not graduate from high school; the minority teacher did not rate any of the minority students in the "will not graduate" category (see Table 3). The white teachers and the minority teacher both predicted that 28.6% of the minority students would graduate with C’s and 0’s. The white teachers said that 35.7% of the minority students would be average students, and the minority teacher rated 42.9% of the minority students this way. The white teachers said that 14.3% of the minority students would be top students in high school, whereas the minority teacher predicted that 28.6% of the minority students would be in this category. The 77 results of the correlation test showed no significant difference. Hence the null hypothesis was not rejected. Table 3.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race--minority students only: Team 3. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority ————————- No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. 3 21.4 - -- 3 14.3 Will graduate--C’s and 0’s 4 28.6 2 28.6 6 28.6 Average student in h.s. 5 35.7 3 42.9 8 38.1 Top student in h.s. 2 14.3 2 28.6 4 19.0 Column total 14 66.7 7 33.3 21 100.0 Chi-square = 2.06250 df = 3 Significance = .55954 Hypothesis Id: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of white male students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. As shown in Table 4, both the white teachers and the minority teacher predicted that 16.7% of the white male students would not graduate. The white teachers thought that 25% of the white male students would graduate with 0’5 and 0’s, whereas the minority teacher predicted that 16.7% of the white males would be in this category. The white teachers said that 41.7% of these students would be average, but the minority teacher thought that 50% of them would be average. Both the white teachers and the minority teacher said that 16.7% of the white males would be top students. The 78 result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not rejected. ' Table 4.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race--white male students only: Team 3. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority ————————— _________ _________ No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. 2 16.7 T 16.7 3 16.7 Will graduate--C’s and 0’s 3 25.0 1 16.7 4 22.2 Average student in h.s. 5 41.7 3 50.0 8 44.4 Top student in h.s. 2 16.7 1 16.7 3 16.7 Column total 12 66.7 6 33.3 18 100.0 Chi-square = .18750 df = 3 Significance = .97958 Hypothesis 1e: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of minority male students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The white teachers responded that 25% of the minority male students would not graduate; the minority teacher did not rate any of these students in the "will not graduate" category (see Table 5). Both the white teachers and the minority teacher said that 50% of the minority male students would graduate with 6’5 and 0’s. The white teachers said that 25% of the minority males would be average, but the minority teacher rated 50% of them in this category. None of the teachers said the minority males would be top students. The 79 result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Hence, the null hypothesis was not rejected. Table 5.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race--minority male students only: Team 3. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority ————————— _________ __________ No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. T 25.0 - -- 1 16.7 Will graduate--C’s and 0’s 2 50.0 1 50.0 3 50.0 Average student in h.s. 1 25.0 1 50.0 2 33.3 Top student in h.s. - -- - -- - -- Column total 4 66.7 2 33.3 6 100.0 Chi-square = .75000 df = 2 Significance = .68729 Hypothesis 1f: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of white female students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. As shown in Table 6, the white teachers and the minority teacher predicted that all of the white female students would be top students in high school. Thus, there was no need to do a correlation test on these responses. 80 Table 6.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race--white female students only: Team 3. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority ————————— _________ ._______— No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. - -- - -- - -- Will graduate-~C’s and 0’s - -- - -- - -_ Average student in h.s. - -- - -- - -_ Top student in h.s. 4 100.0 2 100.0 6 100.0 Column total 4 66.7 2 33.3 6 100.0 Hypothesis 19: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of' minority female students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The white teachers predicted that 20% of the nfinority female students would not graduate from high school; the minority teacher did not think that any of these students would be in the "will not graduate" category (see Table 7). Both the white teachers and the minority teacher predicted that 20% of the minority female students would graduate with C’s and 0’s; likewise, both the white teachers and the minority teacher agreed that 40% of these students would be average. The white teachers said that 20% of the minority females would be top students in high school, whereas the minority teacher thought 40% of these students would be in the top category. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. 81 Table 7.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race--minority female students only: Team 3. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority ————————— No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. 2 20.0 - -- 2 13.3 Will graduate--C’s and 0’s 2 20.0 T 20.0 3 20.0 Average student in h.s. 4 40.0 2 40.0 6 40.0 Top student in h.s. 2 20.0 2 40.0 4 26.7 Column total 10 66.7 5 33.3 15 100.0 Chi-square = 1.5000 df = 3 Significance = .68227 Hypothesis 1h: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of boys only, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. As shown in Table 8, the white teachers said that 18.8% of the boys would not graduate from high school; the minority teacher predicted that 12.5% of the boys would not graduate. In addition, the white teachers said that 31.3% of the boys would graduate with 0’5 and 0’5, but the minority teacher thought 25% of the boys would be in this category. The white teachers said 37.5% of the boys would be average students, whereas the minority teacher predicted that 50% of the boys would be in this category. Both the white teachers and the minority teacher predicted that 12.5% of the boys would be top students. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not rejected. 82 Table 8.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race--boys only: Team 3. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority —————————— ._________ _____*_—_ No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. 3 18.8 1 12.5 4 16.7 Will graduate-—C’s and 0’s 5 31.3 2 25.0 7 29.2 Average student in h.s. 6 37.5 4 50.0 10 41.7 Top student in h.s. 2 12.5 1 12.5 3 12.5 Column total 16 66.7 8 33.3 24 100.0 Chi-square = .39643 df = 3 Significance = .94098 Hypothesis 1i: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of girls only, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. As shown in Table 9, the white teachers said that 14.3% of the girls would not graduate, whereas the minority teacher thought all the girls would graduate. Also, both the white teachers and the minority teacher said that 14.3% of the girls would graduate with C’s and 0’s, and that 28.6% would be average students. Finally, the white teachers said that 42.9% of the girls would be top students, and the minority teacher rated 57.1% of the girls in this category. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not rejected for this analysis. 83 Table 9.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race-—girls only: Team 3. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority -————————- No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. 2 14.3 - -- 2 9.5 Will graduate-~C’s and 0’s 2 14.3 1 14.3 3 14.3 Average student in h.s. 4 28.6 2 28.6 6 28.6 Top student in h.s. 6 42.9 4 57.1 10 47.6 Column total 14 66.7 7 33.3 21 100.0 Chi-square = 1.20000 df = 3 Significance = .75300 1&5 Team 5 was a fifth—grade team at Washington School in the Mount Clemens School District. The team consisted of five teachers; two were white and three were black. Team 5 rated 15 randomly selected fifth graders whom they taught as a team; five of these students were black. Hypothesis La: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of all of the students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. As shown in Table 10, the white teachers said that 10% of the students would not graduate, whereas the minority teachers said that 26.7% of the students would not graduate. The white teachers thought 20% of the students would graduate with C’s and 0’s, whereas the minority teachers predicted that 24.4% of the students would graduate with C’s and 0’s. The white teachers thought that 30% of 84 the students would be average students in high school, whereas the minority teachers rated 28.9% of the students in this category. Finally, the white teachers thought that 40% of the students would be top students in high school, and the minority teachers rated 20% of the students this way. The result of the correlation test of the responses showed no significant difference. Thus, the null hypothe- sis was not rejected for this comparison. Table lO.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race--all students on the team: Team 5. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority -————————— -———————— ————————— No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. 3 10.0 12 26.7 15 20.0 Will graduate-~C’s and 0’s 6 20.0 11 24.4 17 22.7 Average student in h.s. 9 30.0 13 28.9 22 29.3 Top student in h.s. 12 40.0 9 20.0 21 28.0 Column total 30 40.0 45 60.0 75 100.0 Chi-square = 5.23587 df = 3 Significance = .15532 Hypothasis 1b: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of' white students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. As shown in Table 11, the white teachers predicted that 10% of the white students would not graduate from high school, whereas 20% of the minority teachers made this prediction. The white teachers 85 thought that 10% of the white students would graduate with C’s and 0’s, and the minority teachers thought 26.7% of the white students would be in this category. The white teachers said that 25% of the white students would be average, whereas the minority teachers rated 23.3% of the white students in this category. Finally, the white teachers predicted that 11% of the white students would be top students in high school, and 9% of the minority teachers made this prediction. The results of the correlation test showed no significant difference. Thus, the null hypothesis for this comparison was not rejected. Table ll.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race--white students only: Team 5. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority ————————— __________ ________— No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. 2 10.0 6 20.0 8 16.0 Will graduate--C’s and 0’s 2 10.0 8 26.7 10 20.0 Average student in h.s. 5 25.0 7 23.3 12 24.0 Top student in h.s. 11 55.0 9 30.0 20 40.0 Column total 20 40.0 30 60.0 50 100.0 Chi-square = 4.30556 df = 3 Significance = .23030 Hypothesis 1c: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of minority students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The white teachers responded that 10% of the minority students would not graduate from high school; the minority teachers predicted 86 that 40% of the minority students would not graduate (see Table 12). The white teachers predicted that 40% of the minority students would graduate with C’s and 0’s, whereas the minority teachers predicted that 20% of the minority students would be in this category. The white teachers and the minority teachers both said that 40% of the minority students would be average students. The white teachers said that 10% of the minority students would be top students in high school, whereas the minority teachers predicted that none of the minority students would be in this category. 'The results of the correlation test showed no significant difference. Hence the null hypothesis was not rejected. Table 12.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race--minority students only: Team 5. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority ————————— No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. 1 10.0 6 40.0 7 28.0 Will graduate--C’s and 0’s 4 40.0 3 20.0 7 28.0 Average student in h.s. 4 40.0 6 40.0 10 40.0 Top student in h.s. T 10.0 - -- l 4.0 Column total 10 40.0 15 60.0 25 100.0 Chi-square = 4.28571 df = 3 Significance = .23222 87 H othesi l : In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of white male students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. As shown in Table 13, the white teachers predicted that 16.7% of the white male students would not graduate, whereas the minority teachers predicted that 33.3% of these students would not graduate. The white teachers thought that 8.3% of the white male students would graduate with C’s and 0’s, whereas the minority teachers predicted that 22.2% of the white males would be in this category. The white teachers said that 33.3%. of these students would be average, but the minority teachers thought that 27.8% of them would be average. The white teachers said that 41.7% of the white males would be top students, and the minority teachers predicted that 16.7% of the white males would be in this category. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not rejected. Table 13.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race--white male students only: Team 5. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority ————————— ._________ ______——_ No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. 2 16.7 6 33.3 8 26.7 Will graduate--C’s and 0’5 1 8.3 4 22.2 5 16.7 Average student in h.s. 4 33.3 5 27.8 9 30.0 Top student in h.s. 5 41.7 3 16.7 8 26.7 Column total 12 40.0 18 60.0 30 100.0 Chi-square = 3.34491 df 3 Significance = .34144 88 Hypothesis 1e: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of minority male students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The white teachers responded that 16.6% of the nfinority male students would not graduate; the minority teachers predicted that 33.3% of these students would not graduate (see Table 14). The white teachers said that 16.7% of the minority male students would graduate with C’s and D’s; the nfinority teachers did not predict that any of the minority males would be in this category. The white teachers said that 50% of the minority males would be average, but the minority teachers rated 66.7% of them in this category. The white teachers said that 16.7% of the minority males would be top students, but none of the minority teachers made this prediction. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Hence, the null hypothesis was not rejected. Table l4.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race--minority male students only: Team 5. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority ————————— _________ _______—_ No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. T 16.7 3 33.3 4 26.7 Will graduate--C’s and 0’s 1 16.7 - —- l 6.7 Average student in h.s. 3 50.0 6 66.7 9 60.0 Top student in h.s. 1 16.7 - -- l 6.7 Column total 6 40.0 9 60.0 15 100.0 Chi-square = 3.54167 df = 3 Significance = .31540 89 Hypothesis:1f: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of white female students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. As shown in Table 15, none of the teachers predicted that the white female students would not graduate from high school. The white teachers said that 12.5% of these students would get C’s and 0’s, whereas the minority teachers predicted that 33.3% of them would receive C’s and D’s. The white teachers thought that 12.5% of the white female students would be average students, and the minor- ity teachers made this prediction for 16.7% of the white females. Finally, the white teachers predicted that 75% of the white female students would be top students in high school; the minority teachers made this prediction for 50% of the white female students. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Thus, the null hypothesis was not rejected. Table 15.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race--white female students only: Team 5. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority ————————— No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. Will graduate--C’s and 0’s 1 12.5 4 33.3 5 25.0 Average student in h.s. 1 12.5 2 16.7 3 15.0 Top student in h.s. 6 75.0 6 50.0 12 60.0 Column total 8 40.0 12 60.0 20 100.0 Chi-square = 1.38889 df = 2 Significance = .49935 9O Hyppthesis lg: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of’ minority female students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The minority teachers predicted that 50% of the minority female students would not graduate from high school; the white teachers did not think that any of these students would be in the "will not grad- uate" category (see Table 16). The white teachers predicted that 75% of the minority female students would graduate with C’s and 0’s, whereas the minority teachers rated 50% of the minority females in this category. The white teachers predicted that 25% of these stu- dents would be average, but the minority teachers did not rate any of the minority female students in this category. None of the teachers said the minority female students would be top students in high school. Because the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses, the null hypothesis was not rejected. Table 16.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race--minority female students only: Team 5. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority ————————- _________ _______—— No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. - -- 3 50.0 3 30.0 Will graduate--C’s and 0’s 3 75.0 3 50.0 6 60.0 Average student in h.s. 1 25.0 - -- 1 10.0 Top student in h.s. - -- - -- - -- Column total 4 40.0 6 60.0 10 100.0 Chi-square = 3.75000 df 2 Significance = .15335 91 Hypothasis 1h: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of boys only, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. As shown in Table 17, the white teachers said that 16.7% of the boys would not graduate from high school; the minority teachers predicted that 33.3% of the boys would not graduate. In addition, the white teachers said that 11.1% of the boys would graduate with C’s and 0’5, but the minority teachers thought 14.8% of the boys would be in this category. The white. teachers said 38.9% of the boys would be average students, and the minority teachers predicted that 40.7% of the boys would be in this category. The white teachers predicted that 33.3% of the boys would be top students in high school, whereas the minority teachers made this prediction for 11.1% of the boys. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not rejected. Table l7.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race--boys only: Team 5. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority —————————- No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. 3 16.7 9 33.3 12 26.7 Will graduate--C’s and 0’s 2 11.1 4 14.8 6 13.3 Average student in h.s. 7 38.9 11 40.7 18 40.0 Top student in h.s. 6 33.3 3 11.1 9 20.0 Column total 18 33.3 27 60.0 45 100.0 Chi-square = 3.91204 df 3 Significance = .27112 92 Hypothesis 1i: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of girls only, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. As shown in Table 18, the minority teachers said that l6.7% of the girls would not graduate, whereas the white teachers thought all the girls would graduate. The white teachers said that 33.3% of the girls would graduate with C’s and 0’s, and the minority teachers rated 38.9% of the girls in this category. The white teachers predicted that l6.7% of the girls would be average students, whereas the minority teachers predicted that 11.1% of the girls would be in this category. The white teachers predicted that 50% of the girls would be top students in high school, and the minority teachers made this prediction for 33.3% of the girls. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not rejected for this analysis. Table l8.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race--girls only: Team 5. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority ————————— _________ _______—— No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. - -- 3 16.7 3 10.0 Will graduate--C’s and 0’5 4 33.3 7 38.9 11 36.7 Average student in h.s. 2 16.7 2 11.1 4 13.3 Top student in h.s. 6 50.0 6 33.3 12 40.0 Column total 12 40.0 18 60.0 30 100.0 Chi-square = 2.72727 df 3 Significance = .43561 93 EM Team 6 was a four-teacher team located at McKinley Middle School in Flint. The team consisted of two white teachers and two black teachers. They predicted the achievement level of 15 randomly selected students, six of whom were minority students. Hypothesis la: In.a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of all of the students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. As shown in Table 19, the white teachers said that 17.9% of the students would not graduate, whereas the minority teachers said that 13.3% of the students would not graduate. The white teachers thought 39.3% of the students would graduate with C’s and 0’s, whereas the minority teachers predicted that 40% of the students would graduate with C’s and 0’s. The white teachers thought that 21.4% of the students would be average students in high school, whereas the minority teachers rated 40% of the students in this category. Finally, the white teachers thought that 21.4% of the students would be top students in high school, and the minority teachers rated 6.7% of the students this way. The result of the correlation test of the responses showed no significant difference. Thus, the null hypothesis was not rejected for this comparison. 94 Table 19.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race--all students on the team: Team 6. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority ————————— _________. _______—— No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. 5 17.9 4 13.3 9 15.5 Will graduate--C’s and 0’5 11 39.3 12 40.0 23 39.7 Average student in h.s. 6 21.4 12 40.0 18 31.0 Top student in h.s. 6 21.4 2 6.7 8 13.8 Column total 28 48.3 30 51.7 58 100.0 Chi-square = 4.09049 df = 3 Significance = .25186 Hypothesis lb: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of white students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. As shown in Table 20, both the white teachers and the minority teachers predicted that 22.2% of the white students would not graduate from high school. The white teachers thought that 38.9% of the white students would graduate with C’s and 0’s, and the minority teachers thought 50% of the white students would be in this category. The white teachers said that 22.2% of the white students would be average, whereas the minority teachers rated 27.8% of the white students in this category. Finally, the white teachers predicted that 16.7% of the white students would be top students in high school, but none of the minority teachers made this prediction. The results of the correlation test showed no significant 95 difference. Thus, the null hypothesis for this comparison was not rejected. Table 20.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race--white students only: Team 6. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority ————————— ._________ ________— No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. 4 22.2 4 22.2 8 22.2 Will graduate--C’s and 0’s 7 38.9 9 50.0 16 44.4 Average student in h.s. 4 22.2 5 27.8 9 25.0 Top student in h.s. 3 16.7 - -- 3 8.3 Column total 18 50.0 18 50.0 36 100.0 Chi-square = 3.36111 df = 3 Significance = .33923 Hypothesis 1c: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of minority students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The white teachers responded that 10% of the minority students would not graduate from high school; the minority teachers did not predict that any of the nfinority students would not graduate (see Table 21). The white teachers predicted that 40% of the nfinority students would graduate with C’s and 0’s, whereas the minority teachers predicted that 25% of the minority students would be in this category. The white teachers said that 20% of the minority students would be average students, whereas the minority' teachers predicted that 58.3% of these students would be average. The white 96 teachers said that 30% of the minority students would be top students 'hi high school, whereas the nfinority teachers predicted that 16.7% of the minority students would be in this category. The results of the correlation test showed no significant difference. Hence the null hypothesis was not rejected. Table 21.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race--minority students only: Team 6. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority ————————— _________ _______——- No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. 1 10.0 - -- 1 4.5 Will graduate--C’s and 0’s 4 40.0 3 25.0 7 31.8 Average student in h.s. 2 20.0 7 58.3 9 40.9 Top student in h.s. 3 30.0 2 16.7 5 22.7 Column total 10 45.5 12 54.5 22 100.0 Chi-square = 3.97164 df = 3 Significance = .26454 Hypothesis Id: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of white male students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. As shown in Table 22, the white teachers did not predict that any of the white male students would not graduate, whereas the minority teachers predicted that 50% of these students would not graduate. The white teachers thought that 75% of the white male students would graduate with C’s and 0’s, whereas the minority 97 teachers predicted that 25% of the white males would be in this category. The white teachers and the minority teachers both predicted that 50% of these students would be average. None of the teachers predicted that the white males would be top students in high school. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not rejected. Table 22.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race--white male students only: Team 6. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority ————————— _________ _______——— No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. - -- 2 50.0 2 25.0 Will graduate--C’s and 0’s 3 75.0 1 25.0 4 50.0 Average student in h.s. 1 25.0 1 25.0 2 25.0 Top student in h.s. - -- - -- - -- Column total 4 50.0 4 50.0 8 100.0 Chi-square = 3.00000 df = 2 Significance = .22313 Hypothesis 1e: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of minority male students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The white teachers predicted that 25% of the minority male students would not graduate; the minority teachers did not predict that any of these students would not graduate (see Table 23). The 98 white teachers said that 25% of the minority male students would graduate with C’s and 0’s, whereas the minority teachers predicted that 50% of the minority males would be in this category. The white teachers said that 25% of the minority males would be average, but the minority teachers rated 50% of them in this category. The white teachers said that 25% of the minority males would be top students, but none of the minority teachers made this prediction. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Hence, the null hypothesis was not rejected. Table 23.—-Comparison of rating score by teacher race--minority male students only: Team 6. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority ————————— ._________ _________— No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. 1 25.0 - —- 1 12.5 Will graduate--C’s and 0’s 1 25.0 2 50.0 3 37.5 Average student in h.s. 1 25.0 2 50.0 3 37.5 Top student in h.s. 1 25.0 - -- 1 12.5 Column total 4 50.0 4 50.0 8 100.0 Chi-square = 2.66667 df = 3 Significance = .44592 Hypothesis 1f: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of white female students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. As shown in Table 24, the white teachers predicted that 28.6% of the white female students would not graduate from high school; 99 the minority teachers made this prediction for 14.3% of the white females. The white teachers said that 28.6% of these students would get C’s and 0’s, whereas the minority teachers predicted that 57.1% of them would receive C’s and 0’s. The white teachers thought that 21.4% of the white female students would be average students, and the nfinority teachers made this prediction for 28.6% of the white females. Finally, the white teachers predicted that 21.4% of the white female students would be top students in high school; the minority teachers made this prediction for none of the white female students. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Thus, the null hypothesis was not rejected. Table 24.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race--white female students only: Team 6. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority ————————- _________. ________— No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. 4 28.6 2 14.3 6 21.4 Will graduate--C’s and 0’s 4 28.6 8 57.1 12 42.9 Average student in h.s. 3 21.4 4 28.6 7 25.0 Top student in h.s. 3 21.4 - -- 3 10.7 Column total 14 21.4 14 50.0 28 100.0 Chi-square = 5.14286 df = 3 Significance = .16163 100 flyppthesis lg: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of' minority female students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. None of the teachers predicted that any of the minority female students would fail to graduate from high school (see Table 25). The white teachers predicted that 50% of the minority female students would graduate with C’s and 0’s, whereas the minority teachers rated 12.5% of the minority females in this category. The white teachers predicted that 16.7% of these students would be average, and the Ininority teachers rated 62.5% of the Ininority female students in this category. The white teachers predicted that 33.3% of the minority female students would be top students in high school, and the minority teachers made this prediction for 25% of these students. Because the COrrelation test showed no significant difference in the responses, the null hypothesis was not rejected. Table 25.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race--minority female students only: Team 6. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority ————————— -———————— -————————- No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. Will graduate--C’s and 0’s 3 50.0 1 12.5 4 28.6 Average student in h.s. 1 6.7 5 62.5 6 42.9 Top student in h.s. 2 33.3 2 25.0 4 28.6 Column total 6 42.9 8 57.1 14 100.0 Chi-square = 3.45139 df = 2 Significance = .17805 101 Hypothesis 1h: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of boys only, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. As shown in Table 26, the white teachers said that 12.5% of the boys would not graduate from high school; the minority teachers predicted that 25% of the boys would not graduate. In addition, the white teachers said that 50% of the boys would graduate with C’s and 0’5, but the minority teachers thought 37.5% of the boys would be in this category. The white teachers said 25% of the boys would be average students, and the minority teachers predicted that 37.5% of the boys would be in this category. The white teachers predicted that 12.5% of the boys would be top students in high school, whereas the minority teachers made this prediction for none of the boys. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not rejected. Table 26.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race--boys only: Team 6. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority ————————— ————————— ————————— No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. 1 12.5 2 25.0 3 18.8 Will graduate--C’s and 0’s 4 50.0 3 37.5 7 43.8 .Average student in h.s. 2 25.0 3 37.5 5 31.3 Top student in h.s. 1 12.5 - -- 1 6.3 Column total 8 50.0 8 50.0 16 100.0 Chi-square = 1.67619 df = 3 Significance = .64224 teac teac wher woul the tea: the res 6116 la —43>=:£ 102 Hypothesis 1i: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of girls only, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. As shown in Table 27, the white teachers said that 20% of the girls would not graduate, whereas the minority teachers thought that 9.1% of the girls would not graduate. The white teachers said that 35% of the girls would graduate with C’s and 0’s, and the minority teachers rated 40.9% of the girls in this category. The white teachers predicted that 20% of the girls would be average students, whereas the minority teachers predicted that 40.9% of the girls would be in this category. The white teachers predicted that 25% of the girls would be top students in high school, and the nfinority teachers made this prediction for 9.1% of the girls. The result of the correlation test showed 1") significant difference irI the responses. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not rejected for this analysis. Table 27.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race--girls only: Team 6. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority ————————— No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. 4 20.0 2 9.1 6 14.3 Will graduate—-C’s and 0’s 7 35.0 9 40.9 16 38.1 Ayerage student in h.s. 4 20.0 9 40.9 13 31.0 Top student in h.s. 5 25.0 2 9.1 7 16.7 Column total 20 47.6 22 52.4 42 100.0 Chi-square = 4.03938 df = 3 Significance = .25724 103 19M Team 7, also at McKinley Middle School in Flint, consisted of four teachers; three of the teachers were white and one was black. They rated the potential achievement level of 15 students, seven of whom were minority. Hypothesis 1a: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of all of the students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. As shown in Table 28, the white teachers said that 6.8% of the students would not graduate, whereas the minority teacher said that 20% of the students would not graduate. The white teachers thought 27.3% of the students would graduate with C’s and 0’s, and the minority teacher predicted that 26.7% of the students would graduate with C’s and 0’s. The white teachers thought that 34.1% of the students would be average students in high school; similarly, the minority teacher rated 33.3% of the students in this category. Finally, the white teachers thought that 31.8% of the students would be top students in high school, and the minority teacher rated 20% of the students this way. The result of the correlation test of the responses showed no significant difference. Thus, the null hypothe- sis was not rejected for this comparison. 104 Table 28.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race--all students on the team: Team 7. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority ————————— No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. 3 6.8 3 20.0 6 10.2 Will graduate--C’s and 0’5 12 27.3 4 26.7 16 27.1 Average student in h.s. 15 34.1 5 33 3 20 33.9 Top student in h.s. 14 31.8 3 20 0 17 28.8 Column total 44 74.6 15 25.4 59 100.0 Chi-square = 2.45702 df = 3 Significance = .48311 Hypothesis lb: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of' white students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. As shown in Table 29, none of the white teachers predicted that any white students would fail to graduate from high school, but the minority teacher predicted that 14.3% of the white students would not graduate from high school. The white teachers thought that 20% of the white students would graduate with C’s and 0’s, and the minority teacher thought 14.3% of the white students would be in this category. The white teachers said that 30% of the white students would be average, whereas the minority teacher rated 57.1% of the white students in this category. Finally, the white teachers predicted that 50% of the white students would be top students in lrigh school, and the minority teacher made this prediction for 14.3% 0f='the white students. The results of the correlation test showed no 31' compax Table Hill Hill Aver 1' [Op 105 no significant. difference. 'Thus, the null hypothesis for this comparison was not rejected. Table 29.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race--white students only: Team 7. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority ————————— No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. - -- 1 14.3 1 3.7 Will graduate--C’s and 0’s 4 20.0 1 14.3 5 18.5 Average student in h.s. 6 30.0 4 57.1 10 37.0 Top student in h.s. 10 50.0 1 14.3 11 40.7 Column total 20 74.1 7 25.9 27 100.0 Chi-square = 5.60338 df = 3 Significance = .13258 Hypothesis 1c: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of minority students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The white teachers responded that 12.5% of the nfinority students would not graduate from high school; the minority teacher predicted that 25% of the minority students would not graduate (see Table 30). The white teachers predicted that 33.3% of the minority students would graduate with C’s and 0’s, whereas the minority teacher predicted that 37.5% of the nfinority students would be in this category. The white teachers said that 37.5% of the minority students would be average students, whereas the minority teacher 106 predicted that 12.5% of these students would be average. The white teachers said that 16.7% of the minority students would be top students in high school, whereas the minority teacher predicted that 25% of the minority students would be in this category. The results of the correlation test showed no significant difference. Hence the null hypothesis was not rejected. Table 30.-—Comparison of rating score by teacher race-—minority students only: Team 7. 'Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority -————————— __________ ________—— No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. 3 12.5 2 25.0 5 15.6 Will graduate--C’s and 0’s 8 33.3 3 37.5 11 34.4 Average student in h.s. 9 37.5 1 12.5 10 31.3 Top student in h.s. 4 16.7 2 25.0 6 18.8 Column total 24 75.0 8 25.0 32 100.0 Chi-square = 2.05253 df = 3 Significance = .56158 Hypothesis Id: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of white male students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. As shown in Table 31, the white teachers did not predict that any of the white male students would not graduate, whereas the minority teacher predicted that 50% of these students would not graduate. The white teachers thought that 16.7% of the white male students would graduate with C’s and 0’s, whereas the minority tea: cat HOU C01“ The lat SI 107 teacher predicted that none of the white males would be in ‘this category. The white teachers predicted that 16.7% of these students would be average, but the minority teacher rated 50% of the white males as average. Although the white teachers predicted that 66.7% of the white males would be top students in high school, the minority teacher did not make such a prediction. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not rejected. Table 31.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race--white male students only: Team 7. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority —————————- No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. - -- 1 50.0 1 12.5 Will graduate--C’s and 0’s 1 16.7 - -- 1 12.5 Average student in h.s. 1 16.7 1 50.0 2 25.0 Top student in h.s. 4 66.7 - -- 4 50.0 Column total 6 75.0 2 25.0 8 100.0 Chi-square = 5.33333 df = 3 Significance = .14895 Hypothesis 1e: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of minority male students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The white teachers predicted that 21.4% of the nfinority male students would not graduate; the minority teacher predicted that 25% of the teache gradue that 2 teache the mi teach studer these signit W85 llt lahle 108 of these students would not graduate (see Table 32). The white teachers said that 28.6% of the minority male students would graduate with C’s and 0’s, whereas the minority teacher predicted that 25% of the minority males would be in this category. The white teachers said that 28.6% of the minority males would be average, but the minority teacher rated 25% of them in this category. The white teachers said that 21.4% of the nfinority males would I“? top students, and the minority teacher made this prediction about 25% of these students. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Hence, the null hypothesis was not rejected. Table 32.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race-~minority male students only: Team 7. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority ————————— No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. 3 21.4 1 25.0 4 22.2 Will graduate--C’s and 0’s 4 28.6 1 25.0 5 27.8 Average student in h.s. 4 28.6 1 25.0 5 27.8 Top student in h.s. 3 21.4 1 25.0 4 22.2 Column total 14 77.8 4 22.2 18 100.0 Chi-square = .06429 df = 3 Significance = .99575 109 Hypothesis 1f: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of white female students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. As shown in Table 33, none of the teachers predicted that the white female students would not graduate from high school. The white teachers said that 21.4% of these students would get C’s and 0’s, whereas the minority teacher predicted that 20% of them would receive C’s and 0’s. The white teachers thought that 35.7% of the white female students would be average students, and the nfinority teacher made this prediction for 60% of the white females. Finally, the white teachers predicted that 42.9% of the white female students would be top students in high school; the minority teacher made this prediction for 20% of the white female students. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Thus, the null hypothesis was not rejected. Table 33.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race--white female students only: Team 7. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority ————————— ————————— ————————— No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. Will graduate--C’s and 0’s 3 21.4 1 20.0 4 21.1 Average student in h.s. 5 35.7 3 , 60.0 8 42.1 Top student in h.s. 6 42.9 1 20.0 7 36.8 Column total 6 73.7 5 26.3 19 100.0 Chi-square = 1.04209 df = 2 Significance = .59390 110 Hypothesis Id: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of minority female students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The white teachers predicted that no minority female students would fail to graduate from high school, but the minority teacher predicted that 25% of these students would not graduate (see Table 34). The white teachers predicted that 40% of the minority female students would graduate with 6’5 and 0’s, whereas the minority teacher rated 50% of the nfinority females in this category. ‘The white teachers predicted that 50% of these students would be average, but the minority teacher rated none of the minority female students as average. The white teachers predicted that 10% of these students would be top students in high school, and the minority teacher made this prediction for 25% of these students. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Table 34.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race--minority female students only: Team 7. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority ————————— _________. ._______—— No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. - -- 1 25.0 1 7.1 Will graduate--C’s and 0’s 4 40.0 2 50.0 6 42.9 Average student in h.s. 5 50.0 - -- 5 35.7 Top student in h.s. 1 10.0 1 25.0 2 14.3 Column total 10 71.4 4 28.6 14 100.0 Chi-square = 5.01667 df = 3 Significance = .17058 111 Hypothesis 1h: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of boys only, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. As shown in Table 35, the white teachers said that 15% of the boys would not graduate from high school; the minority teacher predicted that 33.3% of the boys would not graduate. In addition, the white teachers said that 25% of the boys would graduate with C’s and 0’5, but the minority teacher thought 16.7% of the boys would be in this category. The white teachers said 25% of the boys would be average students, and the minority teacher predicted that 33.3% of the boys would be in this category. The white teachers predicted that 35% of the boys would be top students in high school, whereas the minority teacher made this prediction for 16.7% of the boys. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not rejected. Table 35.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race--boys only: Team 7. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority ————————— .________- _________ No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. 3 15.0 2 33.3 5 19.2 Will graduate--C’s and 0’s 5 25.0 1 16.7 6 23.1 Average student in h.s. 5 25.0 2 33.3 7 26.9 Top student in h.s. 7 35.0 1 16.7 8 30.8 Column total 20 76.9 6 23.1 26 100.0 Chi-square = 1.56877 df II (A, Significance = .66649 grad girl that mint whit stuc aver be ' prel tes the lat h’i' AW 10] 112 Hypothesis li: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of girls only, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The white teachers said that none of the girls would fail to graduate, whereas the minority teacher thought that 11.1% of the girls would not graduate (see Table 36). ‘The white teachers said that 29.2% of the girls would graduate with C’s and 0’s, and the minority teacher rated 33.3% of the girls in this category. The white teachers predicted that 41.7% of the girls would be average students, whereas the minority teacher rated 33.3% of the girls as average. The white teachers predicted that 29.2% of the girls would be top students in high school, and the minority teacher made this prediction for 22.2% of the girls. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not rejected for this analysis. Table 36.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race--girls only: Team 7. Teacher Race Row Rating White Minority ————————— _________ ______——— No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. - -- 1 11.1 1 3.0 Will graduate--C’s and 0’s 7 29.2 3 33.3 10 30.3 Average student in h.s. 10 41.7 3 33.3 13 39.4 Top student in h.s. 7 29.2 2 22.2 9 27.3 Column total 24 72.7 9 27.3 33 100.0 Chi-square = 2.93529 df = 3 Significance = .40171 '113 Total Group In addition to testing the hypotheses with the four individual teams, the researcher analyzed the data for the total group of 29 middle school teachers and the 136 students comprising their teams. 0f the 29 teachers, 16 were white and 13 were minority. The 136 students included 100 white and 36 minority. The findings from the hypothesis testing for the total group are presented in the following pages. Hypothesis la: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of all of the students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. As shown in Table 37, the white teachers said that 12.2% of the students would not graduate, whereas the minority teachers said that 12.9%. of the students would not graduate. The white teachers thought 34.8% of the students would graduate with C’s and 0’s, and the minority teachers predicted that 29.2% of the students would graduate with C’s and 0’s. The white teachers thought that 32.6% of the students would be average students in high school; similarly, the minority teachers rated 42.1% of the students in this category. Finally, the white teachers thought that 20.4% of the students would be top students in high school, and the minority teachers rated 15.7% of the students this way. The result of the correlation test of the responses showed no significant difference. Thus, the null hypothesis was not rejected for this comparison. 114 Table 37.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race--all students on the team: total group. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority ————————— No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. 27 12.2 23 12.9 50 12.5 Will graduate--C’s and 0’5 77 34.8 52 29.2 129 32.3 Average student in h.s. 72 32.6 75 42.1 147 36.8 Top student in h.s. 45 20.4 28 15.7 73 18.3 Column total 221 55.4 178 44.6 399 100.0 Chi-square = 4.60448 df = 3 Significance = .20316 Hypothesis 1b: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of' white students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. As shown in Table 38, the white teachers predicted that 11.9% of the white students would not graduate from high school, and the minority teachers predicted that 12.9% of the white students would not graduate. The white teachers thought that 32.9% of the white students would graduate with C’s and 0’s, and the minority teachers thought 26.7% of the white students would be in this category. The white teachers said that 31.5%, of the *white students would be average, whereas the minority teachers rated 44% of the white students in this category. Finally, the white teachers predicted that 23.8% of the white students would be top students in high school, and the minority teachers made this prediction for 16.4% of the white students. The results of the correlation test showed no sign comp lab‘ llil Hi1 Ave 10p 110 th 115 significant difference. Thus, the null hypothesis for this comparison was not rejected. Table 38.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race--white students only: total group. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority ————————— No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. 17 11.9 15 12.9 32 12.4 Will graduate--C’s and 0’5 47 32.9 31 26.7 78 30.1 Average student in h.s. 45 31.5 51 44.0 96 37.1 Top student in h.s. 34 23.8 19 16.4 53 20.5 Column total 143 55.2 116 44.8 259 100.0 Chi-square = 5.26993 df = 3 Significance = .15307 Hypothesis 1c: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of minority students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The white teachers responded that 12.8% of the nfinority students would not graduate from high school; the minority teachers predicted that 13.1% of the minority students would not graduate (see Table 39). The white teachers predicted that 38.5% of the minority students would graduate with C’s and 0’s, whereas the minority teachers predicted that 32.8% of the minority students would be in this category. The white teachers said that 34.6% of the minority students would be average students, whereas the 116 minority teachers predicted that 39.3% of these students would be average. The white teachers said that 14.1% of the minority students would be top students in high school, whereas the minority teachers predicted that 14.8% of the minority students would be in this category. 'The results of the correlation test showed no significant difference. Hence the null hypothesis was not rejected. Table 39.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race--minority students only: total group. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority ————————— No. % No. % N0. % Will not graduate from h.s. 10 12.8 8 13.1 18 12.9 Will graduate--C’s and 0’5 30 38.5 20 32.8 50 36.0 Average student in h.s. 27 34.6 24 39.3 51 36.7 Top student in h.s. 11 14.1 9 14.8 20 14.4 Column total 78 56.1 61 43.9 139 100.0 Chi-square = .52745 df = 3 Significance = .91282 Hypothesis Id: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of white male students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. As shown in Table 40, the white teachers predicted that 13.3% of the white male students would not graduate, whereas the minority teachers predicted that 18.6% of these students would not graduate. The white teachers thought that 36.7% of the white male students would graduate with C’s and 0’s, whereas the minority teachers 117 predicted that 18.6% of the white males would be in this category. The white teachers predicted that 34.4% of these students would be average, but minority teachers rated 50%. of these students as average. The white teachers predicted that 15.6% of the white males would be top students in high school, and the minority teachers made such a prediction for 12.9% of the white males. Although the result of the correlation test was not significant at the .05 level, it was very close at .05299. The white teachers tended to predict the achievement level of the white males at a lower level than did the minority teachers. However, the null hypothesis was not rejected. Table 40.—-Comparison of rating score by teacher race--white male students only: total group. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority ————————— ————————— ————————— No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. 12 13.3 13 18.6 25 15.6 Will graduate--C’s and 0’5 33 36.7 13 18.6 46 28.8 Average student in h.s. 31 34.4 35 50.0 66 41.3 Top student in h.s. 14 15.6 9 12.9 23 14.4 Column total 90 56.3 70 43.8 160 100.0 Chi-square = 7.68511 df = 3 Significance = .05299 118 Llyppthesjs 1e: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of minority male students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The white teachers predicted that 16.7% of the minority male students would not graduate; the nfinority teachers predicted that 12.9% of these students would not graduate (see Table 41). The white teachers said that 38.1% of the minority male students would graduate with C’s and 0’s, whereas the minority teachers predicted that 29% of the minority males would be in this category. The white teachers said that 33.3% of the minority males would be average, but the minority teachers rated 54.8% of them in this category. The white teachers said that 11.9% of the nfinority males would be top students, and the minority teachers made this prediction about 3.2% of these students. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Hence, the null hypothesis was not rejected. Table 41.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race--minority male students only: total group. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority ————————— ._________ _________— No. % No. % Mo. % Will not graduate from h.s. 7 16.7 4 12.9 11 15.1 Will graduate--C’s and 0’5 16 38.1 9 29.0 25 34.2 Average student in h.s. 14 33.3 17 54.8 31 42.5 Top student in h.s. 5 11.9 1 3.2 6 8.2 Column total 42 57.5 31 42.5 73 100.0 Chi-square = .06429 df = 3 Significance = .99575 119 H at is If: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of white female students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. As shown in Table 42, the white teachers predicted that 9.4% of the white female students would not graduate from high school; the minority teachers made this prediction for 4.3% of the white females. The white teachers said that 26.4% of these students would get C’s and 0’s, whereas the minority teachers predicted that 39.1% of them would receive C’s and 0’s. The white teachers thought that 26.4%. of the white females would be average students, and the minority teachers made this prediction for 34.8% of the white females. Finally, the white teachers predicted that 37.7% of the white females would be top students in high school; the nfinority teachers made this prediction for 21.7% of these students. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Thus, the null hypothesis was not rejected. Table 42.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race--white female students only: total group. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority ————————— -———————— ————————— No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. 5 9.4 2 4.3 7 7.1 Will graduate--C’s and 0’5 14 26.4 18 39.1 32 32.3 Average student in h.s. 14 26.4 16 34.8 30 30.3 Top student in h.s. 20 37.7 10 21.7 30 30.3 Column total 53 53.5 46 46.5 99 100.0 Chi-square = 4.78134 df = 3 Significance = .18853 120 Hypothesis lg: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of' minority female students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The white teachers predicted that 8.3% of the minority female students would not graduate from high school, but the minority teachers predicted that 13.3% of these students would not graduate (see Table 43). The white teachers predicted that 38.9% of the minority female students would graduate with C’s and 0’s, and the minority teachers rated 36.7% of the minority females in this cate- gory. The white teachers predicted that 36.1% of these students would be average, but the minority teachers rated 23.3% of the minority female students as average. The white teachers predicted that 16.7% of these students would be top students in high school, and the minority teachers made this prediction for 26.7% of the minority females. Because the correlation test showed ru) signifi- cant difference in the responses, the null hypothesis was rejected. Table 43.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race--minority female students only: total group. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority ————————— _________. _________ No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. 3 8.3 4 13.3 7 10.6 Will graduate--C’s and 0’5 14 38.9 11 36.7 25 37.9 Average student in h.s. 13 36.1 7 23.3 20 30.3 Top student in h.s. 6 16.7 8 26.7 14 21.2 Column total 36 54.5 30 45.5 66 100.0 Chi-square = 2.06014 df = 3 Significance = .56002 121 Hypothesis lh: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of boys only, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. As shown in Table 44, the white teachers said that 14.4% of the boys would not graduate from high school; the minority teachers predicted that 16.8% of the boys would not graduate. In addition, the white teachers said that 37.1% of the boys would graduate with C’s and 0’5, but the minority teachers thought 21.8% of the boys would be in this category. The white teachers said 34.1% of the boys would be average students, and the minority teachers predicted that 51.5% of the boys would be in this category. The white teachers predicted that 14.4% of the boys would be top students in high school, whereas the minority teachers made this prediction for 9.9% of the boys. The result of the correlation test showed that there was a significant difference in the predicted success of boys in the total group between white teachers and minority teachers. The minority teachers thought a larger number of the boys would be average students than did the white teachers. The level of significance for this analysis was .02106. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected. 122 Table 44.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race--boys only: total group. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority ————————— No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. 19 14.4 17 16.8 36 15.5 Will graduate--C’s and 0’5 49 37.1 22 21.8 71 30.5 Average student in h.s. 45 34.1 52 51.5 97 41.6 Top student in h.s. 19 14.4 10 9.9 29 12.4 Column total 132 56.7 101 43.3 233 100.0 Chi-square = 9.72465 df = 3 Significance = .02106 Hypothesis 1i: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of girls only, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The white teachers said that 9% of the girls would fail to graduate, whereas the minority teachers thought that 7.8% of the girls would not graduate (see Table 45). ‘The white teachers said that 31.5% of the girls would graduate with C’s and 0’s, and the minority teachers rated 39% of the girls in this category. The white teachers predicted that 30.3% of the girls would be average students, whereas the minority teachers rated 29.9% of the girls as average. The white teachers predicted that 29.2% of the girls would be top students in high school, and the minority teachers made this prediction for 23.4% of the girls. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not rejected for this analysis. 123 Table 45.--Comparison of rating score by teacher race--girls only: total group. Teacher Race Row Total Rating White Minority ————————— No. % No. % No. % Will not graduate from h.s. 8 9.0 6 7.8 14 8.4 Will graduate--C’s and 0’5 28 31.5 30 39.0 58 34.9 Average student in h.s. 27 30.3 23 29.9 50 30.1 Top student in h.s. 26 29.2 18 23.4 44 26.5 Column total 89 53.6 77 46.4 166 100.0 Chi-square = 1.26838 df = 3 Significance = .73665 Mm The results of the hypothesis tests for each of the four teams, as well as for the total group, were presented in this chapter. A summary' of' the study, conclusions drawn from the findings, and recommendations for further research are presented in Chapter V. CHAPTER V SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, DISCUSSION, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY Summary Purpose of the Study The purpose of this study was to determine whether minority teachers have higher expectations for minority students than white teachers do, thereby influencing their achievement not only as role models but also through the preconceived expectations they have of the potential success of the students. A secondary purpose was to determine whether there is a difference in the expectations that minority and white teachers have for white students. Procedures The general hypothesis for this study was: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of white and minority students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. Thi5~~hypothesis was then divided into 45 subhypotheses. The investigator assumed, from the research that has been done about teachers’ expectations and achievement, that the expectation the teacher has for the achievement of a particular student does influence the achievement of that student. 124 125 Twenty-nine minority and white teachers predicted the achievement level of 136 minority and white students later in their school careers. They could select four different achievement levels and also were asked to decide whether the student would complete college. The responses in the latter area were not used in the analysis because 48 of the responses were missing and because it was decided that the question did not relate to the other responses. For' example, even if it; is predicted that a student will not graduate from high school, that person could later get a: GED and later go on to college. A questionnaire was completed by 29 teachers in three school districts in Michigan. The questionnaire had a preselected list of students’ names on it, and the teachers were asked to predict the achievement level in high school of the students on the list. The teachers had their own ideas of how well the students were already doing in school, which, of course, would influence the predictions they made of these students’ achievement later in their school careers. Eight different teams of teachers were found that had a representation on them of white and minority teachers and white and minority students. Teams of teachers were used because they would be rating the same students, thereby eliminating the factor of actual achievement differentiation in students. The statistics of four of the teams were used because more than five of the same minority students were rated by more than two teachers, which was the criterion set up for the analysis. The Pearson product-moment test of correlation was used at the .05 level of significance. 126 Findings and Conclusions Results of the hypothesis tests for the four teams who met the criterion of having more than five minority students rated by more than two teachers are presented in this section. In the following pages, each of the eight subhypotheses is restated, followed by the results for that subhypothesis. 1%; Team 3 consisted of three seventh-grade basic-block middle school teachers from Waverly Middle School in Lansing, Michigan. There were two white teachers and one black teacher rating the same 15 randomly selected students from their team. Eight white and seven minority students were rated by the three teachers. Hypothesis la: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of all of the students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The result of the correlation test of the responses showed no significant difference. Thus, the null hypothesis was not rejected for this comparison. Hypothesis lb: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of’ white students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The results of the correlation test showed that the nfinority teacher and white teachers predicted the achievement level of the white students very similarly. Thus, the null hypothesis was not rejected. Hypothesis lc: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of minority students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. 127 Although the results of the correlation test showed no significant difference, and therefore the null hypothesis was not rejected, it is interesting that the white teachers responded that 21.4% of the minority students would not graduate, and the minority teacher said that all of the minority students would graduate--28.6% as top students. The white teachers said that only 14.3% of the minority students would be top students. Hypothesis Id: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of white male students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not rejected. Hypothesis 1e: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of minority male students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. Although the result of the correlation test showed no significant. difference ““1 the responses, and therefore the null hypothesis was not rejected, it is interesting that the minority teacher stated that all of the minority males would graduate; the white teachers said 25% would not graduate. The white teachers said 25% of the minority males would be average, whereas the minority teacher said 50% of them would be average. 128 Hypothesis 1f: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of white female students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The white teachers and the minority teacher predicted that all of the white female students would be top students in high school. Thus, there was no need to do a correlation test on these responses. Hypothesis Id: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of minority female students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. Although the result of the correlation test showed no significant. difference 'hi the responses, and therefore the null hypothesis was not rejected, the minority teacher said that all of the minorityikmmlestudents would graduate, whereas the white teachers said 20% of the minority female students would not graduate. Hypothesis 1h: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of boys only, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not rejected. Hypothesis 1i: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of girls only, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. Although the result of the correlation test showed no significant. difference -n1 the responses, and 'therefore the null hypothesis was not rejected for this analysis, it is interesting that the minority teacher thought all of the girls would graduate 129 and the white teachers thought 14.3% of the girls would not graduate. General conclusion--Team 3. The minority teacher said that all of the students in four categories (minority students, minority male students, minority female students, and girls) would graduate. Conversely, the white teachers said some of those students would not graduate. The minority teacher might have had higher expectations for minority students or higher expectations in general. Team 5 Team 5 was a fifth-grade team at Washington School in the Mount Clemens School District. The team consisted of five teachers; two were white and three were black. Team 5 rated 15 randomly selected fifth graders whom they taught as a team; five of these students were black. Hypothesis g: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of all of the students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The result of the correlation test of the responses showed no significant difference. Thus, the null hypothesis was not rejected for this comparison. In general, the minority teachers gave lower achievement predictions for all the students than did the white teachers. Hypothesis 1b: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of white students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The results of the correlation test showed no significant difference. Thus, the null hypothesis for this comparison was not rejected. 130 Hyppthesis 1c: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of minority students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. Although the results of the correlation test showed no significant difference, and hence the null hypothesis was not rejected, it is interesting that the white teachers thought 10% of the Ininority students. would not graduate and that the minority teachers thought 40% of the minority students would not graduate. Hypothesis Id: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of white male students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not rejected. In general, however, the white teachers predicted higher achievement for the white males than the minority teachers did. Hypothesis le: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of minority male students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Hence, the null hypothesis was not rejected. None of the minority teachers said that the minority male students would be top students. Hypothesis 1f: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of white female students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Thus, the null hypothesis was not rejected. None of the teachers thought that the white female students would not graduate. 131 Hygmthesis lg: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of minority female students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. Because the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses, the null hypothesis was not rejected. However, it is interesting that the minority teachers predicted 50%. of the minority females would not graduate and the white teachers predicted all of the minority females would graduate. Hypothesis lh: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of boys only, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not rejected. Hypothesis li: In a comparison of how white and minority. teachers rate the potential achievement of girls only, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not rejected for this analysis. General conclusion--Team 5. In general, the white teachers on Team 5 made higherpredictions for the achievement of all of the students. Team 6 Team 6 was a four-teacher team located at McKinley Middle School in Flint. The team consisted of two white teachers and two 132 black teachers. They predicted the achievement level of 15 randomly selected students, six of whom were minority students. Hypothesis 1a: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of all of the students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The result of the correlation test of the responses showed no significant difference. Thus, the null hypothesis was not rejected for this comparison. Hypothesis lb: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of white students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The results of the correlation test showed no significant difference. Thus, the null hypothesis for this comparison was not rejected. Hypothesis lc: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of minority students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The results of the correlation test showed no significant difference. Hence the null hypothesis was not rejected. Hypothesis Id: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of white male students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. None of the teachers predicted that the white males would be top students in high school. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not rejected. Although all of the teachers predicted that none of the white male students would be top students, white teachers said that all of the students would graduate, but minority teachers said 50% of the white males would not graduate. 133 Hypothesis 1e: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of minority male students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Hence, the null hypothesis was not rejected. Hypothesis 1f: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of white female students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Thus, the null hypothesis was not rejected. Hypothesis m: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of’ minority female students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. Because the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses, the null hypothesis was not rejected. The difference that was exhibited between the responses was that the white teachers predicted that 50% of the nfinority female students would get C’s and 0’s, compared with 12.5% rated this way by the minority teachers. Also, the minority teachers rated 62.5% of the students as average, compared to 16.7% rated this way by the white teachers. 134 Hypothesis lh: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of boys only, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not rejected. Hypothesis 1i: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of girls only, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. Genergl gopclusion--Team 6. In general, in five categories-- white students, white males, minority males, white females, and boys--the minority teachers on Team 6 did not predict any top students. Beam—7 Team 7, also at McKinley Middle School in Flint, consisted of four teachers; three of the teachers were white and one was black. They rated the potential achievement level of 15 students, seven of whom were minority. Hypothesis la: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of all of the students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The result of the correlation test of the responses showed no significant difference. Thus, the null hypothesis was not rejected for this comparison. Hypothesis 1b: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of’ white students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. Although the results of the correlation test showed no significant difference, and thus the null hypothesis for this 135 comparison was not rejected, it is noteworthy that white teachers predicted 50% of the white students would be top students, as compared to 14.3% predicted by the minority teacher. Hypothesis 1c: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of minority students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The results of the correlation test showed no significant difference. Hence the null hypothesis was not rejected. Hypothesis Id: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of white male students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not rejected. The minority teacher said that 50% of the white male students would not graduate, and the white teachers predicted that all of the white males would graduate. The white teachers predicted that 66.7% of the white males would be top students; none of the white males were rated this way by the minority teacher. Hypothesis le: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of minority male students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Hence, the null hypothesis was not rejected. 136 Hypothesis If: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of white female students, there will be no difference at the .05. level of significance. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Thus, the null hypothesis was not rejected. Hypothesis Id: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of' minority female students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses; thus the null hypothesis was not rejected. However, it is interesting that the white teachers predicted that 60% of the minority female students would be average students or higher, whereas the minority teacher rated only 25% of the minority females this way. Hypothesis lh: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of boys only, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not rejected. Hypothesis 1i: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of girls only, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not rejected for this analysis. 137 Total Group In addition to testing the hypotheses with the four individual teams, the researcher analyzed the data for the total group of 29 middle school teachers and the 136 students comprising their teams. 0f the 29 teachers, 16 were white and 13 were minority. The 136 students included 100 white and 36 minority. The findings from the hypothesis testing for the total group are presented in the following pages. Hypothesis 1a: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of all of the students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The result of the correlation test of the responses showed no significant difference. Thus, the null hypothesis was not rejected for this comparison. Hypothesis lb: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of’ white students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The results of 'the correlation test showed no significant difference. Thus, the null hypothesis for this comparison was not rejected. Hypothesis lc: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of minority students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The results of ‘the correlation test showed no significant difference. Hence the null hypothesis was not rejected. Hypothesis Id: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of white male students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. Although the result of the correlation test was not significant at the .05 level, it was very close at .05299. The white teachers 138 tended to predict the achievement level of the white males at a lower level than did the minority teachers. However, the null hypothesis was not rejected. Hypothesis 1e: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of minority male students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Hence, the null hypothesis was not rejected. Hypothesis If: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of white female students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Thus, the null hypothesis was not rejected. Hypothesis 19: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of‘ minority female students, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. Because the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses, the null hypothesis was not rejected. Hypothesis 1h: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of boys only, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The result of the correlation test showed that there was a significant difference in the predicted success of boys in the total group between white teachers and minority teachers. The nfinority teachers thought a larger number of the boys would be average students than did the white teachers. The level of significance for 139 this analysis was .02106. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected. Hypothesis 1i: In a comparison of how white and minority teachers rate the potential achievement of girls only, there will be no difference at the .05 level of significance. The result of the correlation test showed no significant difference in the responses. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not rejected for this analysis. Discussion The general conclusion drawn from the analyses of the team teachers’ ratings of the same students was that there was no significant difference in the ratings of minority and white teachers; however, the numbers used in this part of the study were small. Although a significant difference was discovered in the analysis of all of the responses using males as the control and. teacher race as the variable, the results must be considered realizing other factors were not controlled, such as actual achievement or potential of the students. Many of the teachers were rating different students. The difference in the ratings of the boys between the minority teachers and the white teachers could have been because the students were actually performing differently. It was not just a difference in perceptions of the students’ future performance. This problem was alleviated when teachers rated the same students in the teaming situations. Some interesting observations can be made from the statistics that were discovered in the study. It appears from the study 140 findings ‘that Ininority teachers predicted higher’ achievement for white males than white teachers did. This finding was significant at the .05 level. Although none of the other statistics met the .05 level of significance, some interesting findings were discovered. It appears that teachers, depending on whether they were white or minority, had different expectations for white and minority students. It was not consistent, however, for which group they had higher expectations. For example, the minority teacher on Team 3 consistently had higher expectations for the minority students than did the white teachers, but on Team 5 the white teachers made higher predictions for the achievement of all students than did the minority teachers. It can be assumed from all of the research that has been done about teacher expectations that they do make a difference in the achievement of students. If a teacher is biased against a particular group of students, even unknowingly, he/she can give the message to a student that he/she is unable to achieve as much as the other students. Implications It appears from the study that, although it is important to hire minority teachers as role models for students, the reason for doing so is not that they have higher expectations for minority students. Having minority teachers as part of the staff may positively affect the achievement of minority students, but having higher expectations is not a factor that would necessarily affect students’ achievement level. 141 It is important that school district administrators continue to have as their goal the emphasis on teachers having high expectations for all students. Researchers have found that teacher expectations do affect the achievement of students. Even though this researcher and others have not found a difference in expectations that white and nfinority teachers have for minority students, neither has it been shown that all teachers do not have lower expectations for minority students than they do for white students. In fact, from the literature that was reviewed, it appears that many teachers do have lower expectations for minority students. From the literature that was reviewed about expectations, this researcher has concluded that administrators should make a commitment to eliminate all modified classes or ability-grouped classes that are a part of the old tracking system. These types of school-organization systems only serve to reinforce to certain students that they do not have the ability to learn the material. Teachers and administrators should be involved in outcome-based education, with certain expectations for all students. Although it is important for personnel directors to continue to seek nfinority teachers as role models for nfinority students, the total burden of having high expectations for minority students cannot be placed on minority teachers. Personnel directors and personnel organizations must strive to continue to develop criteria for new teachers, to help them determine who will have high expectations of all students to achieve the material. New teachers must be chosen who believe that what they are teaching is important 142 and who have the ability to convey to each student the idea that he/she must learn the material. For those teachers who are already hired in a school system, continuous, accessible staff development must be made available that (a) emphasizes the importance of high expectations for all students and (b) points out that teachers might have biases toward students having certain characteristics that influence the expectations they have for those students and therefore the achievement of students. Research findings should be shared with teachers to provide a sound rationale for insisting on high teacher expectations. The old Teacher Expectations and Student Achievement (TESA) program, which was introduced in the 19705, should be reintroduced. This program fits in with the effective-instruction models that introduce a core of teachers to a specific expectation factor that affects achievement and allow them to critique each other as they observe classroom performance. Recommendations for Further Research 1. If the socioeconomic status and intelligence of the stu- dents were controlled, it would be interesting to do a study of the prediction of the achievement of students using a larger number of teachers and students. 2. It is imperative that all children do well in school. More research should be done on why some minority students do well and others do not, assuming they have the same ability. It would be interesting to use each of the correlates of effective instruction 143 as controlling factors in a study of the achievement of minority students. 3. A study could be done to see whether the expected predic- tion of teachers for minority students is higher in districts where there is a district vision statement and inservice activities that stress high expectations for all students. 4. It is recommended that this study be replicated, using different sample populations, controlling for age and experience of the teacher and type of school district, and that the data obtained in the additional investigations be compared with the results of this study. 5. It is recommended that a study be done on the differences in the achievement of minority students who have had minority teachers in their school careers and those who have not. 6. A study should be undertaken, controlling for the intellec- tual level of students or their present achievement level (reading groups could be used) and asking teachers to predict the achievement of students later in their school careers, to determine whether there is a difference in the expectations teachers have for minority students. 7. A study could be done about the influence that parents’ expectations have on the achievement of their minority children. APPENDIX 144 Student Data Sheet Name: Building: Will Will not graduate Average graduate with C's student from h.s. and D's in h.s. Top student in h.s. College graduate yes/no Student Student Student Student Student Student Student Student Student Student 10 Student 11 Student 12 Student 13 Student 14 Student 15 145 Raw Data Valid Cum. Value Label Value Freq. Percent Percent Percent Teacher Race White 1 226 55.9 55.9 55.9 Minority 2 178 44.1 44.1 100.0 Total 404 100.0 100.0 Valid cases = 404 Missing cases = 0 Student Race White 1 262 64.9 64.9 64.9 Black 2 119 29.5 29.5 94.3 Hispanic 3 22 5.4 5.4 99.8 Asian 4 l .2 .2 100.0 Total 404 100.0 100.0 Valid cases = 404 Missing cases = 0 Student Gender Male 1 234 57.9 57.9 57.9 Female 2 170 42.1 42.1 100.0 Total 404 100.0 100.0 Valid cases = 404 Missing cases = 0 Rating Score 1 50 12.4 12.5 12.5 2 129 31.9 32.3 44.9 3 147 36.4 36.8 81.7 4 73 18.1 18.3 100.0 5 1.2 Missing 404 100.0 100.0 Valid cases = 399 Missing cases = 5 146 Valid Cum. Value Label Value Freq. Percent Percent Percent College Graduate No 1 193 47.8 54.2 54.2 Yes 2 163 40.3 45.8 100.0 48 11.9 Missing Total 404 100.0 100.0 Valid cases = 356 Missing cases - 48 BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Alexander, K. L., Entwisle, D. R., & Thompson, M. S. (1987, November). School performance, status relations, and the structure of sentiment: Bringing the teacher back in. American Sociological Review, 52, 665-682. Babad, E. (1985, Summer). Some correlates of teachers’ expectancy bias. American Edpcational Research Journal, 22, 175-183. Bailey, E. F. (1988). An investigation of teacher expectations and selected potential correlates in a desegregated public school system. Dissertation Abstracts International, 49/07-A. Banks, R. R. (1989, February 15). Focus on minority teachers is misguided. Education Week, p. 21. Bell, M. L., & Morsink, C. V. (1987, March-April). Quality and equity in the preparation of black teachers. Journal of Teacher Edggation, 31, 16-20. Berger, J., Cohen, 8. P., & Zelditch, M., Jr. (1972, June). Status characteristics and social interaction. American Sociological Review, 31, 241-255. Bing, E. G., & Morris, W. N. (1985, July). The effects of direct and vicarious task feedback on the achievement expectations of black and white children. Merrill Palmer Qpartarly, 31, 301- 314. . Brattesani, K. A., Weinstein, R. S., & Marshall, H. H. (1984). Students’ perceptions of differential teacher treatment as moderators of teacher expectation effects. Journal of Educa- tional Psychology, 16, 236-247. Braun, C. (1976, April). Teacher expectation: Sociopsychological dynamics. Review of Educational Research, aa, 185-213. Brookover, W. B. (1985). Can we make schools effective for minority students? Journal of Negro Education, 55, 257-268. Brooks, C. C. (1987, October). Can we have excellence in education without minority teachers? Negro Educational Review, 38. 147 148 Brophy, J. (1987, October). Synthesis of research on strategies for motivation of students to learn. Educational Leadership, 55, 40-48. Brophy, J. E., & Good, 1. L. (1970). Teachers’ communication of differential expectations for children’s classroom performance: Some behavioral data. Journal of Educational Psychology, 51, 365-374. Cecil, N. L. (1988, Spring). Black dialect and academic success: A study of teacher expectations. Reading Improvement, 15, 34- 38. Cherry, 0. E. (1987). Student perceptions and their relationship to teacher behaviors and student achievement. Dissertation Abstracts International, 48/12-A. Chimezie, A. (1988). Black children’s characteristics and the school: A selective adaptation approach. The Western Journal of Black Studies, l1, 77-85. Clifton, R. (1981, October). Ethnicity, teachers’ expectations, and the academic achievement process in Canada. Sociology of Education, 55, 291-301. Clifton, R. A., Perry, R. P., and others. (1986, January). Effects of ethnicity and sex on teachers’ expectations of junior high students. Sociology of Education, 55, 58-67. Contreras, C. D. (1985). Teacher expectations and achievement of bilingual students. Dissertation Abstracts International, 46/06-A. Cooper, C. C. (1988). Implications of the absence of black teachers/administrators on black youth. Journal of Negyp Education, 51. Cooper, H. M. (1979, Summer). Pygmalion grows up: A model for teacher expectation communication and performance influence. Review of Educational Research, 55, 389-410. Cooper, H. M., & others. (1984, September). Teacher expectation research: A review with implications for classroom instruc- tion. The Elementary School Journal, 55, 77-88. Cooper, H. M., Baron, R. M., & Lowe, C. A. (1975). The importance of race and social class information in the formation of expectancies about academic performance. Journal of Educa; tional Psychology, 51, 312-319. 149 DeGruttola, R. (1985, Spring). Culture and ethnicity as conscious- ness. Equity and Choice, l, 63-67. Delgado-Gaitan, C. (1988). The value of conformity: Learning to stay in school. Anthropologyyand Education Quarterly, lg, 354- 361. Dusek, J. B., & Joseph, G. (1983). The bases of teacher expectan- cies: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 15,’ 327-346. Entwisle, D. R., Alexander, K. L., & others. (1986, Winter). The schooling process in first grade: Two samples a decade apart. American Educational Research Journal, 15, 587-613. ERIC Clearinghouse on Urban Education. (1985, Spring). Helping Hispanic students to complete high school and enter college. Equity and Choice, 2, 47-51. ERIC/Cue. (1985). Increasing science achievement in disadvantaged students. The Urban Review, l1, 279-283. Erickson, F. (1987). Transformation and school success: The politics and culture of educational achievement. Anthrppplogy and Education Quarterly, l5, 335-356. Farnworth, M., Schweinhart, L. J., & Berrueta-Clement, J. R. (1985, Fall). Preschool intervention, school success and delinquency in a high-risk sample of youth. American Educational Research Journal, 22, 445-464. Feldman, R. S., & Theiss, A. J. (1982). The teacher and student as Pygmalions: Joint effects of teacher and student expectations. Journal of Educational Psychology, 15, 217-223. Finn, J. 0., Gaier, E. L., & others. (1975, July). Teacher expec- tations and pupil achievement. Urban Edpcation, lg, 175-197. Good, T. L. (1981, February). Teacher expectations and student perceptions: A decade of research. Educational Leadership, 55, 415-421. Good, T. L. (1982, December). How teachers’ expectations affect results. American Education, 15, 25-32. Good, T. L. (1987, July-August). Two decades of research on teacher expectations: Findings and future directions. Journal pf Teacher Educatipn, 55. 150 Good, T. L., Sikes, J. N., & Brophy, J. E. (1973). Effects of teacher sex and student sex on classroom interaction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 55, 74-87. Grant, C. A., & Sleeter, C. E. (1986, Summer). Race, class and gender in education research: An argument for integrative analysis. Review of Educational Research, 55, 195-211. Green, C. F., Cunningham, J., & Yanico, B. J. (1986). Effects of counselor and subject race and counselor physical attractive- ness on impressions and expectations of a female counselor. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 55, 349-352. Haynes, N. M., Comer, J., & Hamilton-Lee, M. (1988, March/April). Gender and achievement status differences on learning factors among black high school students. Journal of Educational Research, 5l, 233-237. Henderson, R. D. (1975, January). School climate in white and black elementary schools: A comparative study. Urban Educa; tion, 5, 380-397. Holmes, W. P. (1986, October). Here’s how our school board is boosting black student achievement. Theafimerican School Board Journal, 173, 38-39. Howe, H. II, & Edelman, M. W. (1986, Summer). Excerpts from barriers to excellence: Our children at risk. Eguity and Excellence, 5;, 111-114. Jacobsen, C. J. (1988). The relationship of match or mismatch of student learning style preference and the formation of teacher expectations of student achievement. Dissertation Abstracts International, 49/08-A. Jordan, C. (1982, December). Translating anthropological knowledge into effective schooling for ethnic minority children. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Anthropological Asso- ciation, Washington, DC. Jussim, L. (1986). Self-fulfilling prophecies: A theoretical and integrative review. Psychological Review, 55, 429-445. Karlins, M., Coffman, T. L., & Walters, G. (1969). On the fading of social stereotypes Studies in three generations of college students. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, l5, 1-16. Keith, T. Z., & Page, E. B. (1985, Fall). 00 Catholic high schools improve minority student achievement? American Educational Research Journal, 55, 337-349. 151 Kortokrax-Clark, D. (1986-87, Winter). The minority teacher shortage: An overview and a solution. Action in Teacher Education, 5, 7-12. Leder, G. (1987, July). Student achievement: A factor in classroom dynamics? The Exceptional Child, 55, 133-141. Lee, C. C. (1985, Spring). Successful rural black adolescents: A psychosocial profile. Adolescence, 55, 129-142. Marcoulides, G. A., & Heck, R. H. (n.d.). Teacher education reform: Issues of equity and accountability. The Urban Review, 55(2), 125-133. . Marcus, G. L. (1986). A comparison of fifth-grade black and white students of similar achievement level in their perceptions of their teachers’ treatment of them. Dissertation Abstracts International, 50/01-A. Moll, L. C., & Diaz, S. (n.d.). Change as the goal of educational research. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, l5 (4), 300- 311. Ogbu, J. U. (1987). Variability in minority school performance: A problem in search of an explanation. Anthropology and Educa- tion Quarterly, l5, 317. Quzts, D. T. (1986, January). Teacher expectation: Implications for achievement. Reading Horizons, 55, 133-139. Raspberry, W. (1990, March). A journalist’s view of black econom- ics. Imprints (Hillsdale College, Hillsdale, MI), pp. 1-2. Rist, R. C. (1970, August). Student social class and teacher expectations: The self-fulfilling prophecy in ghetto educa- tion. Harvard Educational Review, 55, 411-451. Roberts, 1., Hutton, J., & Plata, M. (1985, July). Teacher ratings of Hispanic, black, and Anglo students’ classroom behavior. Psychology in the Schools, 55, 353-356. Rubovits, P. C., & Maehr, M. L. (1973). Pygmalion black and white. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 210-218. Russell, G. H. (1988, October). Minority teachers: Dinosaurs of the twenty-first century? AASPA Research Brief, l, 3. Santos, S. (1986, Spring). Promoting intercultural understanding through multicultural teacher training. Action in Teacher Education, 5, 19-25. 152 Short, G. (1982, June). Teacher expectation and West Indian under- achievement. Educational Research, 51, 95-101. Sizemore, B. A. (1985). Pitfalls and promises of effective schools research. Journal of Negro Education, 55, 269-288. Smith, M. K. (1980). The relationships between mother and teacher expectations and child academic and behavioral performance. Dissertation Abstracts International, 41/07-A. Smith, T. L. (1980). Self-concept and teacher expectation of aca- demic achievement in elementary school children. Journal of Instructional Psychology, l5, 78-83. Spencer, M. 8., Kim, S-R., & Marshall, S. (1987, Winter). Double stratification and psychological risk: Adaptional processes and school achievement of black children. Journal of Negro Education, 55, 77-87. St. John, N. (1971). Thirty-six teachers, their characteristics and outcomes for black and white pupils. American Educational Research Journal, 5, 635-647. Suarez-Orozco, M. M. (1987). Becoming somebody: Central American immigrants in U.S. inner city schools. Anthrppology and Edpca- tion Quarterly, 15, 287-299. Tewel, K. J., & Trubowitz, S. (1987, October). The minority group teacher: An endangered species. Urban Education, 55, 355-365. Trueba, H. T. (1988, September). Culturally based explanations of minority students’ academic achievement. Anthropology and Educational Quarterly, l5, 270-287. Trujillo, C. M. (1986, Winter). A comparative examination of classroom interactions between professors and minority and non- minority college students. American Educational Research Jopr- pal, 55, 629-642. U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. (1973). Teachers and students: Differences in teacher interaction with Mexican American and Anglo students (Report V: Mexican American Education Study). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Velez, W. (1989). High school attrition among Hispanic and non- Hispanic white youths. Sociology of Education, 55, 119-132. Vogt, L. A., Jordan, C., & Tharp, R. G. (1987). Explaining school failure, producing school success: Two cases. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 15, 276-286. 153 Vollmer, F. (1986). The relationship between expectancy and aca- demic achievement--How can it be explained? British Journal of Egucational Psychology, 55, 64-74. Walker, E. (1988, June). Providing positive role models for young black males. Phi Delta Kappan, 55, 773-774. Walsh, M. (1989, September 20). Average scores on A.C.T. and S.A.T. again dip slightly or remain stagnant. Education Week, p. 5. Washington Report. (1989, September 20). Dropout rate has declined, E.D. reports. Education Week, p. 12. Welch, O. M., Hodges, C., & Warden, K. (1989, April). Developing the scholar’s ethos in minority high school students: The vital link to academic achievement. Urban Education, 55, 59-76. Williams, T. (1976, July). Teacher prophecies and the inheritance of inequality. Sociology of Education, 55, 223-236. Wong, M. G. (1980, October). Model students? Teachers’ percep- tions and expectations of their Asian and white students. Sociology of Education, 55, 236-246. nICHIGnN STATE UNIV. LIBRARIES lllllllllllWilllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll 31293010553240