3 ms·
I'm very skeptical too especially when they write this near the end of the paper: "One virtue of the affirmation is that it can be combined with instructional
by btmorex 16y ago
I'm very skeptical too especially when they write this near the end of the paper:
"One virtue of the affirmation is that it can
be combined with instructional approaches that
show promise in closing the gender gap, such as
the interactive engagement approaches used in the
present course"
so the course they are teaching isn't a standard physics course. They very well might be on to something, but I think it's a huge stretch to attribute the performance difference to a couple 15 minute writing exercises. (what is "interactive engagement" anyway? not explained in the paper)
- shasta 16y agoYes, the other "stereotype threat" researchers (studying race effects) also gave oral exams, and I agree that this is very fishy. Why in the world would you do an "interactive" physics exam in this situation if you had any interest in objectivity? Generally this just strains credulity. Telling yourself "I can solve this problem" goes a long way in math and physics, but there's also a feedback loop (the article even alludes to it) - successfully solving problems makes you better at solving problems. So how is it that over a decade of damage due to this effect can be undone with a single inspirational chat?