5 ms·
I recall one study in which students who tested as “dumb” were placed into gifted classrooms, and students who tested as “smart” were placed into remedial class
by hugh3 16y ago
I recall one study in which students who tested as “dumb” were placed into gifted classrooms, and students who tested as “smart” were placed into remedial classes; the teachers were none the wiser and had no resume to assume that something was afoot. After a year of teaching, “dumb” students tested “smart” and “smart” students tested “dumb”.
Anyone know whether this study actually exists? It sounds rather unethical; how did they get permission to do it? If it took place in the US I'm sure you'd have a pretty big lawsuit on your hands.
- zackattack 16y agoI can't recall the study off the top of my head but it's also mentioned in this TED talk: http://www.ted.com/talks/view/id/769 http://www.ted.com/talks/view/id/769
- dantheman 16y agoWow, from that description the study seems completely unethical.
- angelbob 16y agoI read about at least one study (different description, illustrating the same principle) where they gave a set of teachers a list of students' names with numbers next to them. Apparently it was implied (or just not stated, which would be similar here) that the numbers were test scores or IQs. Sure enough, there was a strong correlation between the number by the student's name and how well s/he tested after a year. The numbers were random, of course. Specifically, they were locker numbers.
- klipt 16y agoLocker numbers aren't entirely randoom - while it seems unlikely there'd be a correlation, I'm surprised they didn't just use real random numbers to rule that out. Maybe walking further between classes makes people more likely to be late and less prepared to pay attention?
- kahirsch 16y agoThere are a variety of studies related to what is called the "Pygmalion Effect". See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pygmalion_effect http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pygmalion_effect Not all the studies show an effect and in those that do, the effect is usually not large. Here's a recent review: http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~jussim/TEs%20and%20SFPs%20Jussim%20et%20al%20Handbook.doc http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~jussim/TEs%20and%20SFPs%20Jussim... (MS-Word document).
- hugh3 16y agoThanks for that. I find the idea of a small effect to be totally plausible. But the results of the supposed study as described, in which one year of being treated as smart was able to turn dumb kids smart, and vice versa, along with the questionable ethics of allowing anyone to perform such a study in the first place, leads me to dismiss it as an urban myth until proven otherwise.
- Tichy 16y agoDon't know the study, but it seems worth pointing out that it probably didn't show dumb kids becoming smart and vice versa - it showed kids who were previously perceived as dumb to become perceived as smart, and vice versa. I don't actually understand why it should be unethical? This happens all the time, at least in my country: pupils are sorted into different schools according to their perceived smartness (higher education or "lower" education). That might well be unethical, and such studies seem to be a good way to find out about it.
- jodrellblank 16y agoI don't actually understand why it should be unethical? Because you are deliberately taking children identified as smart, and putting them in a group which is taught slowly, intending to slow them enough to see if they show up as dumb. Essentially, wasting a year of their lives / schooling.
- Tichy 16y ago