Educational Psychology 7e: Canadian Edition - Chapter 6 Summary PDF

CHAPTER 6 Aquaswim/123R CULTURE TEACHERS and DIVERSITY CASEBOOK: White Girls Club m You teach in a fairly homogeneous primary school. In fact, most of your kindergartengrade do? 1 students student came to are middle your school. or upper-middle Her family class is and Muslim and white. from In Janua...

CHAPTER 6 Aquaswim/123R CULTURE TEACHERS and DIVERSITY CASEBOOK: White Girls Club m You teach in a fairly homogeneous primary school. In fact, most of your kindergartengrade do? 1 students student came to are middle your school. or upper-middle Her family class is and Muslim and white. from In January, Iran, and a new children notice you that her a scarf, few would mom dresses or hijab, weeks, you She sits and at recess then that is the notice alone one differently in the she day library is you that the than overhear moms, their cultural tradition in the student new and last their to two plays be is alone chosen of your wearing and not for religious being at recess. loose-fitting any team. one higher-achieving in sits This is girls and community. included No clothing with troubling talking After many activities. her at lunch, enough, about their what White Girls Club. CRITICAL THINKING Would If you you found students, If you investigate that your what teach themselves would older by to learn who more students you students, cannot had about this created club? a club How? that excluded non-white do? what be can you members? do about student groups that define a but OVERVIEW The face today. AND of In critical Canadian a talk the in 5). fabric We of society. diversity. Within education, presents completed this today Describe diverse 6.3 Explain how Describe 6.5 Define the text, of the Culture The knowledge, rules, guide people the environment. 196 the and behaviour and problems allow values them of embraces diversity, classrooms. By the and The last time you have in North American schools influence teaching and learning in a and schools. identity and research the on stereotype role of threat gender diversity to the diversity, so in might teaching. creation of culturally and produced concept embraces from if way and turn each one, is the Male or female? back voice you and characters each or all of the Cul-ture people. a minute Tuesday!) ad old ethnicity in on. of or take next in the observe of the so a group until mean-ing section television, character What is the many instances of social at the music, reading or the examine events of life on the to will a look classical whole come we with cultural festivals, the wont We begin with the reading, you of how of culture. Most include practices, etc.), group passed some traditions, political, particular and diversity. Look or young? or race? For category. Membership religious, a cultural of Shakespearean it For norms, in this break definitions rules, associate or poor? Group many aspects do this tally of as language, of down to self-definitions, people the as next and values well as the generation following: institutions that art, (Cohen, shape and literature, 2009, the knowl-edge, (educational, guide beliefs folklore, 2010; and Pai & Adler, The group creates a culturea program for livingand communicates the culture that of a group of living dimensions multicultural tra-ditions, 2001). attitudes, not do a quick behaviour artifacts a quick advertisements. communal, and diversity in Apply museums, privileged are this important student. discrimination, gender meaning; (Do of 15, skills, legal, people Take Internet. Culture and race interpretation gender broader & THINK Economically There broad galleries, a sample reflect diverse CLASSROOMS and Many much the at some of education. a ethnicity, newspaperart surf the form classrooms. we take race, STOP cultural achievement development multicultural of culture. to stories that to: how prejudice, and DIVERSE a able and ethnicity, ethnicity, learning TODAYS has be and and every cultures culture and resilient teaching The (Pajares, We consider incorporates said, our lives three gender. compatible for culture class, race, compatible this culturally of examine Pajares many whose and countries by universal the meaning we that Frank shape examine many and teaching. social student 6.4 class, reform for be settled that students culture, said society. affect In four of school of we the meet of should learning forces considering principles you cannot chapter, be Association, that race/ethnicity, creating meaning how by can cultural class, general impacts this conception to chapter, the will process the In begin social three Describe 6.2 broad identity: at approaches section 6.1 We a general we look right. same Research matters to schoolsyou this students The Educational attention he is in changing. involve demand population every American believe our is education They p. student classrooms to the questions prescription. 2000, OBJECTIVES to solve in their of to members. Groups can or lines. Each class, many For other different example, cultures. if you be defined of us is Sometimes are a feminist along a regional, member the of many influences but also ethnic, are a Roman religious, groups, so incompatible Catholic, racial, we all or you are even may gender, social influenced by contradictory. have troubl CHAPTER reconciling Your the Many in up in in on suburbs in Quebec. are the up in African, Great a Asian, especially are hidden and traditions, in of only very have as priests. each group. students students rural that of Within media, but and other aspects signs portion One-third of culture, of the of the such as differences iceberg foods, among is visible; dress, and cultures, as you 6.1 CULTURE AS AN Heroes ICEBERG and Heroines Cooking and foods Literature MythsMusic Dress Games Language Notions of modesty Holiday Childrearing of eye Explanations of contact of of Conception of the natural Roles disease Conception of Beliefs justice Nature of Preference for Definitions of to and friendship Facial competition showing or Beliefs Just differences cause as most of out the of misunderstandings iceberg sex, is of and conflicts. and about social ability mobility kinship, Concept out effort of of of and so forth time Conceptions MUCH women insanity Sense cooperation awareness. and occupation, expressions MUCH, conscious of class, respect AND men fairness cleanliness age, world about Definition relation customs beliefs Understanding in and of their backgrounds. FIGURE Roles tradi-tions. experiences 6.1. Rules clerk Individuals histories common small store dentist. distinctive many town students those a convenience or liv-ing growing a small from doctor mass Canada, suburb. of shares the with up in different town descent of In a Florida the women ways from daughter country of identify growing is of an iceberg. visible a small of in child influence to The a number or European cultural compared unknown. the or the country. that son a particular differing been reflect Figure American, by has from within because shaped Culture culture the you modern or students Quebec, ordination strongly students group centre or in States, a cultural urban living differ the how every United of about on within the Plains Latin Everyone values, In different part, certainly part Northeastern in beliefs in thrive of Toronto Plains a large cultures be based, cultures Great grows is will a farm the lives different belief different the towns of two personal 6 personal learning and teaching spac MORE... sight and It is below the the out-of-awareness water line, so differences are most that cultural often the rest marriage can see CULTURE AND DIVERSITY 197 198 PART 1 STUDENTS Many They of the and beliefs groups, the even 2005). head differ surface. biases in relationships, listeners and the unconscious Cultures interpersonal some of are below unstated, (Sheets, conducting In differences are implicit, rules for give a slight affirmative an occasional uh perhaps for example. nod huh to Image indicate they other or are listening cultures with eyes cultures, and listen downcast, ask the other of respect. initiate the of In some conversations and low-status cultures, members acknowledgement, a sign individuals questions, In But giving as high-status respond. carefully. without individuals pattern is only reversed. McVay/Photodisc/Getty Cultural sive. influences Some defines are psychologists intelligence. widespread even For and suggest example, perva-JUST that culture physical grace is Reed/Ryan essential in physical ONE Baker/Jason racial, of CULTURE? gender, many groups, social so Definitions class, and of culture other apply areas we all are influenced to regional, of difference. by many ethnic, Each different religious, of us is a social movements culture. is in Western skills life, a Manipulating member cultures. Balinese so mark words societies, are indicators the to master of intelligence and so ability in numbers in these is that impor-tant cultures of intelligence such (Gardner, 2011). Chad cleanliness is obsessed people cleaning with details Meet In emphasized, with the Four Students 1 now. you As with lives statistics; University of statistics classrooms work they are composites taught. The names and Ternice siblings Mattox in then a large cleans and and sister makes had them class, she wrote the wanted, said him to take about people In she her was talked and actin so white, she Her English that. with wrote so white. still class Even to if she the One Best her stories year if she got in, in got that mad her. Tone is can shes all, until even class and not into afraid that as the she a final over gifted wouldnt Bailey that acting kind her Her got of liked talk. She downtown. the In authors whatever could but let be really her school on you away, and foolish 10. got really right you the home, was usually why write, in Anthony good. copy get to about to broth-ers she she and and her they day mistake liked Anthony plant never any write published him all nearly get had and younger gets students do you the specific three since she meet every really got told written let you she But should off for that and She she count not known when this want could not from are school to sta-tistics do dry-cleaning doing much. characters of kids out you a elementary too those has and dinner been the real. at them seemed like the didnt other and this what did. bothered see people, she much talked Knapp meet, so Ternice has in at Nancy mother shift ends she teacher very all 2003). teachers Nancy her 3:00 day, feeds she found of She has Ternice tests and Ternice at it. but it a lot; some and good they to back students are knowing But people with Ternice; English real lives make night; for said 6 about life, class, at teachers way 7:00 to every hard grade about own that school very talking the your with of. was acting Her stories work Ternice she got even proud of the stories the homework year. but the weekends Look These real become emphasized, (Lemelson, diverse. individuals. who lives works with Canada. where often are network more of fictional, and been in individuals. 7 student for a lot reading characteristics mother ready ever last meet four nights do their hasnt until you and they though school Her some up sure School Bs, even city. offices us to a grade obsessed becoming are cultures networks social studentsunique are social become students disorders industrialized disorders where often are the psychological In familytheir of schools is Bali, about with invites people; in and see, they Georgia friends of culture. obsessive-compulsive whereas some can by disorders of their read you symptoms with hands, obsessive-compulsive about Chapter work people their Even affected teacher newspaper. her about was go together, worse and why than she likes notebooks. teacher program, know from but anyone. last year Ternice Almost is wants not so all the her sure kids CHAPTER in gifted are Besides, around with where all white, she can Ben local go from Still, bank His out into of pre-med medicine is at not the either the teachers He remember to lose takes his of skills, Ben Ritalin on Art is that by keeping track notebooks and them be turned to improved days, and but not of the try and his whole family grade 8 sections with his doctor a solid is of he put home-room him on on he a organiza-tional B average. when did sometimes coaching which every-thing when semester, additional weekends, notes; down mess that first strug-gled taking and a the to says really write miss going focused. he of to such of With some gets hang and end was mother and assignments, were finished on hed his the he just the Ben and Ben feels he Bens sister, get so ADHD, help. his something At for do it if week-end. English, if a are the course. science. like backpack in. evaluated seemed gradually forget the graphics web comic. and more very good; if say at cant of the art the read out some to were run all night, He does still most restaurant dishwasher, and hes reading has Jessie receptionist, for of to and his hell do Kinkaid in mom tried when dad. his with is a small to good 12. in him orders She town. to to as clear help and try got run the work the art be courses. cash grill. afraid to everyone is, him, he just read but seems told some he to them a small hates read of he town his read sick and hes He can to and to When tables wont a lighter problem do. even something glad. grades so mistakes. fall him Its more he took but else in He own having because The kids there; get well. him already dad lets grade house can a while was just take running in got hours his funny. some well, stupid last of a living. one. restaurant very take Everyone dad if anyway, other makes and a his doing dumb him pretty hes better one is listening and long out Davy He learn for she quit. no a family work a aloud. mom pretty make not of the if up own to on teases experimenting was worried and people working panels Ritalin, do questions, ask reading his work way been it Hes he is most freezes didnt sometimes older, turns parents and you thought track and a few year. no drawing hes in, hes drawn with the asking if zoned he could that way been when even advanced especially take both it read, got impatient the time, His but but its has Lately, even knows like with dad weekends. but he being but they worries the he just His and him. hes of the laugh conference home. mom he could she When at a get and this really they that and Ben out reading them it schoolwork 2 and enough calls his art, hobby, He doesnt faster had at a it. has and on bed for grade has teacher his his boy Sometimes friends, on move nice up some a little mom computer, chemistry. in on to he more and that if teacher live, on flunk was imagination. His focusing sometimes catch better His him and to words much is is his come his it to could about you, when he Walker seem shown may even he of didnt on focusing he his teacher looks she has trouble trouble Davy if only never parents ask eat Since out of time. program especially His loves. scenes all track to Hes he load, really whole he loses hed weird, Ben and with to distracted which school what animals drawing, it get time got can at father for chemistry. that year. artwork. and a hed and weeks the from last president French, insisted most important vice a pre-veterinary couldnt hard he Ritalin, He just away class mother history, on Ben the go no telling thats two especially father student a he every a jump-start or is CULTURE of town. dont theres English His mom idea, knows was father taking says her part brains anywhere like world a star school. what his before she and hospital. his another school, try go algebra, get been to university but to never out suggested dose and middle had class, is, of of to classes his his fathers that had her His sees taking are from At her want more a local still year is he has do them, teacher trial money of but was in He said, also doesnt have board he wants community. second college, figure them could schedule sure. he couldnt Ternice year; beginning lecture. her the so but kids Anthony. mom a suburban league in where Bens hed in his Her his father, this His course completely the is American especially she of the with school chemistry. in member sister high African it, versa. wishes lives and older started vice there, she Ben lives few not like and Whittaker divorced. the might regulars, her friends. get and her friends 6 where older to sister her the when baby harder, it went up, stack dishes register Davy and does they helps she books he grows the needed so slowly hes going in make not put that to the big change. see what restaurant. lives Her with father her owns mother, a car who works dealership as and a doctors lives just AND DIVERSITY 19 200 PART 1 STUDENTS outside of town pretty Jessie in a year, a real flair school. do is her until least only After up since she Walts Her use. Ben, ethnic from in Before and like a four punctuality. distance or Cultural these a baggie, Not a professor all part and at the student this The what is her Jessie open. millions more, languages, will all have Some but look cautions all at the are because course, and face dimen-sions necessary. much real First, of the children members is not destiny. not tell you your are of a job Just avail-able not many just groups, knowing what class that before a student student consistently a cultural is school or like. arrives difference the late, in must beliefs walk of for school the British rules problem in to a long the rules versus girls Columbia, school, asked to These in may American to be cul-ture schools. perceived her girl who her little officials from the be taken Jim Canadian, tried brother made cafeteria. familys cafeteria however. Chinese common. mainstream school to the may conversations. disrespectful. give food be very or they behaviour to honouring backpack in are and the take in culture rude but to turn dominant, Mexican sharing, may dress, conflicts home by talking clashes your a different being lunch, school cultures and appropriate a 5-year-old her get and or or cafeteria of lead to of the in rules, against baggie between customs how normal describes solved as socialized school was differences as holiday competencies the proud differences University urging options privilege, we Of misunderstandings and been following putting gradu-ates. schooling of communities. and chapter reflects such considered have it case kinds power beings in has such meet, were about cultural at school. (2005) because one her are two behaviour the values of the extra different separately, does a student not following parents in if the Sheets was conflicted in Walt have described. differences who roll, away, The teacher Then Differences membership students differences children Her roll Aikens as she on all speak with complex characteristics Hernandez day. the he is the theyll as long is keep different variables. are Compatibilities. when in of the group dreads determine a bread a pro-gram until on a been started years. money marry, to They gender of these group the and to differences, and they be that inappropriately, Rosa bring for today. example, she happen cases, as acting girl may or and to going going have wait hopes studentsthere remainder cultural that cultural used and to or four grades, in shes They house her 17 families cultural one that For It can are for at and live ethnicity, below-the-surface When subtle plan Jessie Jessie four Cultural particular he just we have just is assume subtle, conflicts every a that year three time experiences. schools only students waste wants from the or female; tip-of-the-iceberg very throw on Conflicts obvious, in caution not about For bases are individuals. should are and others class, class, of last They has chefs somewhere Aiken. house. to point what of she apply any town small Once end says can see in the another big school just backgrounds, the social member People roll him Ds. by the knows Walter year. about to left Jessie Interpreting second a job into in the she she graduated move worrying she abilities poverty, focuses the The to sees a few teacher doesnt marry this into foolish who says education. middle but get Walt theyll in be and differences research to with graduate so parents; shell probably point She racial their consider going move grades at it, university retire, mother, in about or to theyll would of we examine will Asian, In so she Cs, to economics her her school. local home good then makes credits up please and Then any it Davy, of cultural Cautions shes high married. on. families challenges Her shes small mostly enough bring to money a Jessies collections different knows began see going unique come be half-brother, then. Ternice, with to graduation and agrees about Jessie and get doesnt father never you 3-year-old and have about. graduating some farm, by school cares wants dad is ready the So Jessie is Jessies shell really at they child think cook science over one shell to Shes at but and save animal take she life. to before farm all likes together finished just and track a course, cooking years in we wife vocational fails school. with going to his second the which Jessie couple will in she for more to is while, next to with often. cultural cook, home Anderson val-ues. getting after her The the school. (1995), Indo-Canadian CHAPTER and European reading in of all direct and Canadian and writing three tried to teach children What skills and Dangers in example, as model have as real student Irish Ontario, students their birth. acted One very colored much. contact cultural Even (Liu et al., status (SES), only In Class modern high in register in class and believing remember what Grits are of on the those drop they poor. that social 8 years in my explore Too country of the hair some call-ing born old. the way color. ways to examine refer was affected changed class is one researchers Different I create of of the have terms wealth, add are poverty, the I got cultur-ally effects most great of meaningful difficulty defining usedsocial or considerations they high class, privilege. of power, them. dont of my They an described mostly live hicks Its the usually really classes. than in school, socio-economic Some people influence, in the slums. get Grits bad in. (Brantlinger, They or is long that mobil-ity, the gritsthe smoke, grades. are least most do They dont troublemakers. 2004, pp. on the dress like school I 109110) popular and dont group: herself] grungy. so see avoid-ing you popular Hillthats over They I think them in racism 1 if correcting live drugs, classes most gener-ally them (like Chapter of the have social are above of classism We[quickly guess people people social reason-ably of the are (see member country. Most Some are Other members a kind study a that groups of lower Marissa, I be gone. show consistent. power. some members always professions may ethnographic or rednecks. fit wealth may even not of or they perceive means), them They They little money they example, are members family is, they of town. prestige wealthy, are better For call and provide not their below I think any but ethnographic accents. in She was even to be like DIFFERENCES same power, are though are her side a lot. tend would she their students achievement. others classthat my friends hick arent they them. in west out status that with some decades American [TV] will we professorsare social some clique student 2013). wealth, though social association privileged of even of their or sexism), not of even a town, aware we describes many Ireland. foreign I stereotypes (2008) teachers from Watching however, these That For American prestige. university terms power social levels instance, political (2008), background, and on how when impact. North Lee that Canada feel chapter, those differences; these SES societies, peoplefor economic resources, and this Macionis, matter once, and the Asian Americanized. agree lives, 2004; to CLASS would peoples suggests negative Acting shows Ireland Lee on a or American. heart First, SOCIAL economic over in discrimination in to more Later home. literacy understand Stacey No came told contexts. AND control Social 44). passive. research father to be most researchers class consider (p. and dimensions social to at Anderson in fifth-generation Lees been student classroom though only have Moreover, American her was teaching teachers students foreigners. fact, stereotypes wanted lenses ECONOMIC cultural has school I conflicts In implicitly responses activities directly events. if can Asian and fourth-or because these high compatible even not Asian and take all assertiveness. Americans. an literacy stereotypes as perpetual America, as Asian, Oshawa, often, in students Nancy in are seen lived seen to these positive stifle all of literacy form words), (e.g., across on some Par-ents them. hardworking, and in CULTURE the 2. difficult of literacy placed matter promote grade decode evident array really characterizing studentsquiet, Americans not accommodate in wide to uses was to engaged how and occurring may doing through children, or emphasis naturally Even dangers conformity Asian families in their What a were kindergarten spell value relative cultures to to experienced children willing the they in to teaching). was the across things read how about groups groups are they direct Stereotyping. reinforce not three are there context that children differences differences how all five children children through involving some are their among versus that describe of their teaching or in differed to indicated (e.g., modelling that can groups teaching through parents development 6 have they much; do and AND DIVERSITY 20 202 PART 1 STUDENTS In addition commonly power, In lead even to income, youth, education to appeared arrive to When live National users in who are homeless and income 60% more likely to J. J. chronic these Cutuli and his students highly resiliency Homeless more so how likely to important to About one in with 39% nations third. There socially, is is and higher Canadians makes 2009; levels little about Sirin, of 2005). who Socioeconomic (SES) society background, status Relative based standing on and income, prestige. in the power, the education, classes Izard, are and impact is (see bit of in of over homeless in spite parenting, Chapter 12), whole and book) particularly impor-tant. in the Because time problems. time, this skills 2012). how early grades self-regulation Chapter 11 exploring chance that by 2%3%.30 high-SES stay in to back year of McClelland, Wethington, who (29% of the bottom medically, than poverty in rate for the them a Canada elderly priority, are even groups which when live we take or in Moen, the placed SES Cooper, show students at least longer grades between Arneson, low-SES poor in have poverty industrialized top correlation ethnic And the children 41 rich at the of of child Kuncel, all are be retained of making average than school. risk par-ticular perspective. (Sackett, longer the rate higher welfare For example, will every the not The.40 For immigrant, children high are and are who in 25th and for sufferdevelopmentally, That students school achievement. for children social Children children ranked 2013). 33%40% families 2017)we policies 2000, between particularly is achievement? be kept the a poverty. and about to on social (Campaign (e.g., population economic 2003). Bronfenbrenner, Canada of poverty in lone-parent (UNICEF, and Cole, increases 2004; a of scores effective are con-tribute overcome. of the (see school (Buckner, have card school and poor as students in to across such self-regulation mobility face 45% motivation years and 2012). general general, & not the an achievement Sameroff, early were test range factors with in also showing moderate, In better higher Children report tax from is far education for our SES or and year high reading physical, a school the that of factors difficult in shelter Students risk and and academic a range in are average quite live is a result rate sense the who According of all 2005. other times that math that home. from for resilient found spend Canada evidence the in see skills. rate (UNICEF, achievement Gutman, stronger of 2017 suggests What school in academicallyas than and parents you 6.5% many more are school stable risk and The will children). ample and did increase grades 11), a taking problems reading these the levels UNICEFs children Achievement respectively) in not advertisements Homelessness relationships we develop children low Chapter throughout children of about people even or the the students. everyone, seven SES variable, approximately additional students concluded develop successful and Indigenous parents and these School groups in teachers who students and refugee, be for help Poverty for students school, eighth (see and determining single Students a 50% after 2013). analyzed through skills many is three al., these (2013) at even moved in of researchers teaching studied lack This are et achieved The you 2012), 16. often (Cutuli many students of example, problems third data or designation. occupations, how Mobile sometimes who grade colleagues self-regulation supported is a As Segaert, age students and from of For risks, mobile quality are very challenges. student the move risks with their or repeat Even 26,000 of to they the account, SES. No parents chapter, Highly 2014; under difficulties. into and (Noble, who collecting status, SES for 2005). is wealth, SES? poverty, Study When that in socioeconomic of their formulas Sirin, income, this differences variations called conscious different of of index not about combine 2013; SES. indicator of thinking an are family beginning children learning levels overall extreme are of considers Homeless in into by researchers; lower-class Shelter Canada social, an Poverty: psychologists people measure at the the way and (Macionis, (2008) at be in families the people effective activity Extreme and assignments an another prestige most to Canada & Think class, ascribed is is and social different Statistics Stop there Sociologists resources, to usually might class, research. over contrast SES is social in control SES. to to used twice child into in & higher average (Berliner, as likely is in special (Ackerman, & Ceci, 1996) 2005; as poverty, account poverty and Waters, chil-dren the parents education Brown, & CHAPTER What are the achievement for mother stress, and and born other Health, is and nutrition. mothers and is to Families in Over half birth. with Poor to with and on the higher levels of of these development amino Deakin, 2014). than can of synaptic acid that calms air and children lead less assume these they work. low inadequate in Chapter discrimination, pay find peers are homes. Students after in Some group, much noted school for have members class. In students John Native poor students must Ogbu linked American, white in many to cooperating 1997). American, Richell, breathe more as likely school as non-poor achievement 1998). may and wear other avoid calling of may accept poor along with a helplessness, also encounter a high world. may themassuming resources learned who clothes, on educational expectations, work old students and the sense the and students, Papua possible much friends suggested that of this culture, order racial school Many diploma, available to likely jobs low-SES their identity identification in in Guinea the United (Woolfolk Hoy, and attend col-lege concluded attendance. who may plan to their make to class but similar attend in status them of and within the 2011; to poor and & Pape, a out successful reactions England, part selling (Bennett, culture Demerath, become means and a resistance States of early. would groups, most low-income college friends school coming to from (2013) in students that likely Palardy school it in even American have making behaviour African to where are discrepancy who leave maintain the more students Gregory of this less schools 68% of the causes, with teachers, both New are have attend are most predictor reject who families where strongest schools To schoolstudying, 1987, the more likely act middle low-SES in the an 2007; twice Without Students schools for were culture. to them Novak, standards, end. High decrease of tryptophan, lower may a experience brain, students Low and Coun-cil families. children at least those dead high-income in controlling researchers resistance trying middle-and high-poverty and awaiting Cultures. students influences college rewards Resistance from to Even peer to a the & and lead poverty supply with particularly is in McLoyd, lower stress Scientific wealthy poor are teacher set in teachers can school have wage. and compared that few that grow, 2004). children, can depression, National (Hudley Overman, experience, more (cocaine, problems increased bodys institutionalized, & are drugs and increased and low-SES The may Poor prematu-rity concentration, blood the activities, answer, Low-SES of 2004; bright. (Borman decide a living Influences their the not become 4. may students barely Peer know educational described these not are lives 2009; associated Because school and a care all. pregnancy children They (Evans, and expectations are lower-quality books students do Thus, provided with flow is at poverty illegal and effort, As they which impairment their years, water. Self-Esteem. familiar that 2006). poisoning, neurological in behaviours contaminated before health care in during middle-class deplete violent even babies, and (Jensen, the and Shonkoff, more ExpectationsLow be in with and 2005; suffer early connections, drink to long-term the describe infant prenatal Children drugs and children In interfere impulsive & Anderson, polluted Child, and no attention cells) begin premature stress motivation hormones hormones toxic brain another (1998) skills. decreased of new care homelessness, McLoyd alcohol) take 203 DIVERSITY family jobsand prenatal have AND school health resources, poverty problems. language have reduced (growth stress to absences, thinking, Developing levels Low more likely to mothers and of good (nicotine, whose school likely CULTURE of them. receive learning drugs attention, are neurogenesis more and legal Children increased memory reduced both organization, children related are and effects to lower Poor overcrowding, at each mothers the 2004). and low-paying look access adolescent cognitive explain limited (2009), negative less might (Evans, violence, Jensen The that blame failures a closer have all to school take poverty to to Stress. many exposed before problems Lets to environments, (2004), mothers with is exposure Evans of status cause unhealthy lead poverty. adolescent be heroin) or factors and associated likely and schooling, explanations. born. or in Environment, child No one other in possible socioeconomic dangerous interruptions generation of low students? child, discrimination, is effects of these 6 in Ogbu, Hispanic have among 2002). Resistance culture been and beliefs about high adopt the attitudes Group refusing behaviours of the values to and majority culture 204 PART 1 STUDENTS This is not to achievement. Longitudinal have Study These should of are forget that testing and too hard all students too their focus not Image on Vianne SUMMER the SETBACKS. summers while Children in middle-and poverty lose upper-class ground academically families provide of are educational of how risk should place Judy that does Lupart and a for Canada stu-dents for educators 2006). at across on students summarized students identified is in solely an inclusive (2003) that resistance blaming (Stinson, we stressful work To focus way school Timmons study during many making And of schoolingcompetitive instead, resistance and resilient. repetitive 2001). achievement; invite be encourage a the school reprimands, and is (NLSCY) despite well in aspects public (Okagaki, lower to easycan resistance Work said assignments, or do some grading, Youth students, face, resist National and some they students Canadian Children students not the that challenges life. all low-SES from demonstrated enormous in say that Data national learning and difficul-ties what provinces Doolittle/The experiences over the summer for their children. grade 2 and grade One and advantaged study suggests that the and schools are doing for these students. They con-cluded J. four summer vacations achievement between differences between poor 6 account for 80% of the that students. students characteristic at-risk status of individuals; is rather, not simply the result it is of factors a of Michael interactions among social, (p. 219). seek According to to eliminate Home and social and spend libraries, lack children. time parents for resources school is not Summer in poverty grade 6. lose school but and the the school gap One getting Tracking Assignment classes based and on academic achievement. to different experiences for is 80% & Teaching. that though both is that groups the summer four achievement children from (Kim students poorer & Guryan, truly from years by homes achievement read-ing 2010; between between This students a three-month vacations 2008). neigh-bourhood when three comparable about differences 2003, making and that to almost make children library, mounting to creates their reading school. compared the for achievement been grows low-income Home enter reading groups advantaged that of the in read computers, all the better. childrens has vacation McGill-Frazen, actually students of abilityand, taught classes, more Read likely the they to Another these on judgments are general are gap suggested students the growing and before behind summer poor on not to are high-quality children childrenby children impact Poor environments their children evidence between every between or decade, Even year, the their greatest months this summer. (Allington Poor students They six taking for to cognitive books, Again, encourage access enhances to learning and problems. poor is grade and a case Kim & 2 advan-taged of the rich richer. Tracking: based toys, access 2010). rich personalized have that 2004). less Guryan, and summer difference study support the past for 6 accounted students the about the over 2013). grade have the explanation achievement Quinn, to & care Vandell, have provide outcomes Over begin during educational sessionduring homes, ground gains in One and seem Setbacks. wealthier SES level learningthe Kim families of any books space they 2004; of these of contexts students seldom kind 2000; television; (Evans, Many poverty the & Brooks-Gunn, to within community are contribute in children, and programs that Families young watching museums providing and their cultural, successful conditions Resources. for resources. When them, time and Timmons, (Duncan more trips, families to care development and and environmental Environment preschool less Lupart the a confluence economic, be arguments explanation experience therefore, differently may be encouraged in the for (Oakes, taught to to think the lower achievement trackingplacement have 1990). and different If they memorize Point/Counterpoint a and create in are be in box. their of classes academic tracked passive. classes. into low-SES strands socialization. low-ability Middle-class Is many or tracking or students a prob-lem? CHAPTER POINT/COUNTERPOINT Streaming or gifted, etc.) but does tracking has it been Is Tracking students into practised in work? Critics say and should April 1999 different classes Canada tracking and is an Effective or other harmful, 6 strands while prep, countries supporters for claim it AND 205 DIVERSITY Strategy? (college/university developed CULTURE vocational, decades is (Krahn useful, remedial, & Taylor, even though 2008), it presents challenges.. Tracking is Loveless, harmful writing in argued, national of POINT equal students open, while carefully high of low-track students p. for 28). than and students and gap is 2002). In [T]racking less and to be the & And, because reading child who is Scherer side predictive. low suffer Oakes, Marge predictive greatest 1990; Oakes (1993), The little in to take identified large national Jonathan & who grade gets is very about far, good. But average bright schools. of algebra in the 8th grade, and most likely to courses, not college courses, in the 10th hasnt dropped out by then. (Scherer,1993, Proponents should benefit students most from from the disadvantaged elimination stu-dents, female academic stu-dents) stream and education classes and results grade classes lose Loveless First, low-track points students than argue that students opportunities during high school lose tracking is from the students have when students brightest should So points eliminating a low achievement. high-ability of of 10 stu-dents rather in 2 percentage of the of tracking tracking? with different to take (Krahn different & Taylor, 2008). be in students can learn better and Finally, they enjoy learning more grade, grouped homogeneously. argue that teachers p. 8) backgrounds of tracking. when to and accommodate students within student classes are less differences more easily diverse. Is this BEWARE likely? when consequence of courses can attend Therefore, Tran-sition traditionally (immigrant costs. 5 percentage and aptitudes when if she that withdrawal They contend vocational No positive Youth in groups, eliminated heterogeneous Another flightthe sequences instead to heterogeneous 5 points. the post-secondary hidden suggest gain abilities cosmetology study assigned into schools possible they put if some are so and Fuchs, 1998). students in the high-track 2008). happen tracks, about girl 2nd (1999) students the of tracking: group urged of school low-income they 2008; out is would for the the by tracking for not people classes, eliminate minority open most Clinkenbeard, that remaining but as work (Fuchs, data from indicate options & Taylor, What & visible tracking time, effects to to be disadvantaged their (Krahn seem And that honours wants Canada from First, positive Robinson programs. of the time. have Research-ers believe programs, classes are, in fact, keeping that students who drop tracks, with cruel found high-track students gap to 1998; students. some of the parents, in to students Gifted of these many at tracking all seems COUNTERPOINT students of high-track Gamoran not Karns, Study achievement achievement low-and the and especially effects well-done the some placement Hamlett, one, in increases 1986). & Taylor, so utterly the the lower an interview is into the (Krahn the tracking Kerckhoff, between in described shoved boosting who graduate. tracking that for tracking advanced advantaged relatively harmful closely students. more will hurt looked all students agree, represented Afew by depressing between gap overrepresented from found 1987; the be from it and tracking? achievers students achievement likely way post-secondary disproportionately against studies and low (Gamoran, Wells, 1999, more poorer the findings keep may tracking have thought evidence designed between Kozol in argument; that who prestigious stands and courses Eliminating Lead-ership, programs. What is the harm this from are and reported wealthier take students backgrounds vocational support Tom Educational tracking (2006) from to eliminated. of (Loveless, Guppy that backgrounds options greater Neil research advantaged that opportunity and for be issue researchers argued educational common family are have Davies Canadian the Prominent reports Scott the In OF some EITHER/OR. classes, achievement using algebra classes that 1992). simply And in students So For not the students than mixed-ability do classeswhatever MacIver, a of all students. a eliminating answer? for tracks students who as students of the students did not have (Kulik As usual, it is representation to the in tracked (Epstein self-esteem lower & found self-esteem & Kulik, 1997). Avoiding of certain but so is pursue hinder heterogene-ous more complicated tracking. is important, prefer to in much classes or implementing lower seems students of student classes heterogeneous what is the so-called as level meta-analysis or unwarranted the learn ability low-track in structure example, groups providing educational than overrep-resentation goals that Education do not lead to every to college students and interests university programs. and achievement Merrill answers for different students at different Careful may times. in alter-natives attention mean different 206 PART 1 STUDENTS GUIDELINES Teaching Educate Students yourself about Who Live in the effects of Poverty poverty on student Build learning. Examples Read 2. Seek reliable articles with Poverty and What and from good journals. sources in Mind: Schools maintain such What Can high as 1. Eric Jensens Being Do (2009) Poor About Does Guard against to Kids less. knowledge skills how to skills as part of the organize work, focus attention, or help. conflict in Notice good to for students, pity excusing with empathy poor work, based on management and social problem-solving lessons. health students Notice 2. Check that the they can succeed problems. can do challenging criticism quality because you believe and see the to be absent whether some discussions. or tardy students Can they often. struggle see from to the hear back room? Model healthy eating and physical activity. your Assess work. subjects who seems to class of with 3. constructive students 1. students. effort. Provide Add sorry Replace of your Communicate 4. students appropriate 2. Include Brains It. expectations. feeling expecting solid 3. self-regulation Examples and 2. Teach seek Teaching Examples 1. and Examples 1. Set learning curriculum. stay AP classes. student there knowledge; (Milner, start where they are, but do not 2010). Examples Develop caring relationships with your students. 1. Use 1. Use inclusive 2. short ungraded objectives Examples languageour school, our Talk to students interests and class, our projects, 2. our Differentiate Attend sports 4. Create a class assessments each that target the learning unit. instruction (see Chapter 14) based on results. efforts. outside class. Make a point to identify their Many examples abilities. Mind: 3. for or other welcome events centre where your students for families (see Even with participate. if Chapter they limited, about not tracked, and an inferior with 2003). quality not See the teaching for ETHNICITY from Poor Alexandria, Jensen, Does VA: to E.(2009). Kids Association low-income students less-effective teachers education, beginning Woolverton, It. adapted Being Brains for Teaching and What Supervision with Poverty in Schools and Can Do Curriculum Development. resources receive are 5). are inadequate About What their being prepared Guidelines: students AND academic RACE skills for live are higher Teaching who are likely to 2004). inferior education Students in more (Evans, attend When and their (Anyon, Who Live schools low-SES life 1980; in stu-dents chances Knapp Poverty for & ideas poverty. DIFFERENCES IN TEACHING AND LEARNING Canada truly Canada, living in on ethnicity Terms: Ethnicity Ethnicity shared A cultural by a group heritage of people. is 2013), a Canada and usually language, background is Puerto society. million are of lets According Canadas members race, Ethnicity homeland, Hawaiian, diverse 6.8 of visible clarify to the residents some National are foreign minority groups. Household born, Before and Survey one we look in (Statistics five at the people research terms. and Race refers to a groups traditions, British, Rican, shared or religion. French, Italian, Cuban, Hungarian, common We all Ukrainian, German, cultural have some characteristics ethnic Hmong, Chinese, African, or Irishto such heritage, as history, whether Japanese, name our Ojibwe, only a few CHAPTER Race, share on the other biologically colour or hair to themselves In fact, texture any part 2005). level, our race is involved to or numerical ethnic certain places Asian communities This heritage has A major 2005). in pattern United of from Education varied must gaps ethnic in from schools in racial Van-couver. or ethnic historical connota-tions lead white groups is product the is the The to gap 19 in to but five Educational (at decades Progress in fourth-graders between 2013 gap has white and (National been His-panic Center by that people can and and that all excellence walks of life such are for gapsall (2006) students 2012). living in (p. education poverty 9). and in described may experi-ence in and care multiple He suggests quality gaps, nutrition gaps, opportunity the based gaps for educational on a that Multicultural emerge successful culminating Ladson-Billings taking norm of color does health for are the (Anyon, as teacher gaps, criticized students teachers curriculum and have middle-class measured education of are of for consistent agree of these 2010). as it is any for other these mismatches, are two For attentiveness, development school, students, 91% the white debt decades sets among a recent persistence, of African of of under-investment are of for and the States in of Afri-can 60% Islanders, from dropout some rate for 2011). groups mainly on tests the growing on school found organization, American to students up in of achievement that from learning Race discrimi-nation, poverty. but it is learning boys of cognitive legacy disadvantaged, study United Asian/Pacific rate students ethnic a result of influences all the compared (Richards, differences economically example, dropout group or also Across high Canada differences that cultural effects in gaps. from American than than groups (such Latin higher minority literacy completion graduated Similarly, higher & Vaughn, skills of American the & Johnson, tests, past four and child-care to 62% there Mohammed, 2013. 1996 white, of gaps, students most researchers from the below Uline achievement over African in achieve 2010; reminds from Gloria Americans. youth the color quality students, Although to 2013) of colour of Native Indigenous explained racial because discrimination. 80% of separate that refers particular of their Cortina, Assessment and 25 in of challenging and students American to people term students negative standardized an achievement kinds colour. Opportunity students to consistently & narrowing points scores life of gaps, of and about groups white 26 compared other gaps, we owe abilities, of the inner-city has is group Achievement National of from (2010; people housing minority and for been the to of the of normal about funding 1996 be Milner forms: students on narrowed that type we think 61% the are race 2013). situations, because race At the example, of Rowley, hold have scores notion assuming students affordable and some to 2013). H. Richard 2007, in others. Referring some one-hundredth due level, however, in races. (about a group majorityfor ethnic to gaps in of this view, a different that label apply pure and (Macionis, to population. School some example, has Proponents many with speaking, the Kizzie, between points Statistics, that tends the For 34 is results gap fourth-graders school interact 207 DIVERSITY who different ethnicity misleading in (Matthews, States) the narrowed and is AND as skin people.012% individual as minorities is only codes structures countries it of that incorrect people because schools 2009). mathematics, that Rim to that biologically At the Strictly actually a label no genetic group women such construct. minority total men and emphasize political the is are average their and technically is Pacific students This other with is Differences in all the scholar and group Racial (Raudenbush, all an of treatment. criticized concern narrow random, term race There ourselves use the of referring effect, of significant, CULTURE 2010). for least In a powerful economic from and average understand minority been is compared practice (Milner, Ethnic we as minorities the 354). psychologists discriminatory minority groups at race with unequal a or many sometimes as socially sequence Still, identityhow composed defined appearances. chosen Today category are p. on alphabetic ideas. Sociologists receives based the as a that 2013, others of constructed of defined traits humans 1%) (Myers, socially to two of race is (Macionis, and for hand, transmitted 6 Many (Roberts, and are seen people Minority self-regulationpeople independence) kindergarten common that the important A group share minority who biological traits as self-defining of the group who have disadvantagednot to of people in A group been numbers of socially always actual by group. a 208 PART 1 STUDENTS grade 5, even after and So early gap, for Rather than research in-depth study high of the and and In success next other had many boys who experiences and of successful to and pre-school extracurricular lead educators and to to iden-tify success. African understand suc-cessful in students that an were encouraged minority for support athletic Berry called conducted math factors the have (2005) American church envi-ronment, 2010). opportunity positive stories them the educators Berry students. home others. found significant prepared close for Berry to math characterized families our the and theme abovetheir connections SES, & Cortina, students, teachers; on to students. of those and help gaps, boys Rowley, probably African lives as skills, final the can and minority identities focus strengths, One of school; positive to skills boys, of the Kizzie, achievement family elementary researchers effects middle-school-aged from and the on mathematics. activities; learning successes of two the (Matthews, American focusing expectations account these African on in into behaviours development at least more taking problem American and deal with boys discrimi-nation, topic. The Legacy of Discrimination When we considered school, we listed Many children forty hand their to two Linda stop waited the she school half to an four hour 2nd In one Why, she her to away? (Macionis, her 2003, Imagine that walked four hand blocks in school refused another school to a bus stop, Linda became parents, the from but the weather, in stu-dents. attend blocks day she trouble fellow do? minister grade, bad asked and school walk six bus. bus came; home. blocks the have teachers you a required had to for would Kansas, in the officials students experiences. What an elementary enroll she the back to of similar own. of Topeka, school time walked only wanted meant that wet by the that city biases have your daughter public This sometimes be soaking Collection/Getty in the Brown her. Instead, miles away. she ago, why low-SES and students are his seven-year-old home. admit for expectations below years with low ethnic-minority described Almost Image explanations the where Brown so cold could would at the she bus not attend p. 353) Images Linda LIFE suit Browns against the policy. LINDA the BROWN plaintiff in Nine-year-old Brown v. Board Linda of Brown, of Education for Iwasaki/The of of The Topeka, all Topeka. is students, basis [The who schools] operated funds.... socially, but The residential persisted Columbia reported few in went Bachor, to The last what of Indian research in integrated and United built for the institu-tional Indigenous curriculum, and emotional University out or of represented dropped and additional vocationally, at the schools all Educa-tion States. historical academically, the of education of teachers, scholars Nearly social Canada on often, schools. closed process, Schools Canadians is Too suffered Residential and integration that youth. a seg-regation communities. who inspected 1961, Board as the were their successful... native reconciliation based Commission inequality. in many school and peoples Years even in the well schools of v. appropriate example administrators,... In government for Brown filed school Brit-ish a severe before difficulties. grade 12, (Crealock & 518) Reconciliation mandated racial p. a truth happened the and residential on Indigenous and university, 1995, embarked to experience not 1960s. the and as another outside were the families, case, Canada is provided concerned challenged of free government who schools into landmark Residential educated churches other and principle in education. of Topeka system by the federal Christian they discontinuity the adopted then were funded by the help of school in were the of that for principle residential discrimination children, with Education outcome the a Canadas Carl parents, Board of the not effects a quick of Simply mutual renewed a decade all later, Canada Canadians relationships understanding desegregation to students putting Over to inform and about between respect (Truth 2015). solution minority-group 1996. and inspire on Canada, in seeking people have the detrimental are in re-segregated the same mostly shown effects that of legally centuries in low-ability building does of tracks not mean CHAPTER that they will come of education The Peoples each other kindergarten of to This is in classrooms. Principles grade 12 (see students a response to themes example, Figure will experience 6.2) and a lessons in the principles in BC are newly same is being of learning attending implemented focusing recommendations schools and schools includes the they qual-ity to Truth grow-ing the First curriculum on Indigenous of the recog-nized is and for history Reconciliation and Com-missions report. The Canada teacher University are of British Indigenizing education their programs Columbia (UBC) teacher education especially for Interest across in Indigenous Canada. Learning First Nations Education to In themes BC teachers ensure Indigenous Steering Committee, PEOPLES and and and students ways www.fnesc.c of learning other and teachers of institutions some First across have developed Nations ancestry. 6.2 PRINCIPLES principles several programs preservice FIGURE FIRST OF of learning are working are CULTURE 1998). pedagogies Indigenous For Learning that Pettigrew, Indigenous and interest and or even 2004; of incorporating Canada schools culture. respect importance across in to (Ladson-Billings, 6 is LEARNING growing with incorporated the in schools First Peoples in their and curriculum. classrooms Principles of AND DIVERSITY 209 210 PART 1 STUDENTS The hope is at in that UBC public once students complete schools their and in the degrees, provide NITEPIndigenous they Teacher will return high-quality, to culturally their Education band sensitive Pro-gram schools or teach instruction to Indig-enous students. Gwen a Point publication language and come and advocate for she was Simon Indian. At of her on the Fraser were people, been verge which University as to the not have there she the Sto:lo no First university did. for Indigenous Halqemylem community. Columbia I to was go to advocate restoring people. shame: opportunity to what her her and and and Connected, learned of the her exactly the British songs told educator in extinction, and and did is an in She discrimination Indigenous, instrumental of stories about Point profiled (2004). grandmother career has the school, teachers was Teachers learned Points your history of with she a distinguished Especially, with along school, help whose College curriculum. and had which Indigenous being the home educa-tor to None in has culture. A distinguished of content Point POINT went Halqemylem. Nations educator Columbia grandmother, she ashamed speak British her when became an Indigenous the from However, GWEN is of In College of lan-guage, cooperation Teachers, Point Poin culture, Gwen Gwen program First that Nations Point developed prepares adults communities to a developed from to a certificate teach it to students program that public and in allows adults First to Nations learn the schools. language One and graduate prepare of the pro-gram teach of says, their language to students in First Nations language with Point our What Is is is help and For lazy to to build learn the awareness well Targets location, about age 6, parents language. and by And by sharing self-esteem. develop racial combine personal and source on the tend of of see infants have religion, of the own have better lead seen Prejudgment, generalization play or about of people. to an group people to a vented In of deserve the their part as For their to have victims: People problems well. When example, anger by their things in by the attacking not or faces even States, By pro-white, biases young unless their they are many of social not young prejudice us, al., superior or got we look for the Americans who events each for months, those who privilege have-nots. they (Myers, We to 9 Also, someone tragic By their the women what similar a preference 2013). to two made membership. races. may justify into may be but show other et world team months poverty Arab early. are that divisions from with after starts parents, athletic as 3 are in wrong, innocent negative geographic appealing, the different prestige) they it beliefs These behaviourThey go to development divide (Anzures more United al., positive 2005). experience who live refers significant their of the as young because they et have politics, develop from to and status, believe can and are out-group. ethnicity, own-race social the no peo-ple. actions. (Aboud usually had McKown, as inferior had you you popular beliefs tendency infants have more these and age, fact, they recognition blaming blame. if money, they as causing alike. race more (more that sex, out-group sample will 2003; human of particular religion, Two explanations in-group is, Prejudice category if pervasive, coaching (Katz, the is they direct speak grand-parent, appearance. 1995). Although prejudge. to parent, (action) word ethnicity, Canadian that a entire them that but the or a word overweight date negative; prejudice Current is the toward are to on race, in factors or the to tendencies a group, and prejudice. prejudice or & Aboud, without social race, their assuming can Even all look of students (Doyle As an who gender, allowed... students. refuse positive prejudiced. members otherThey faces be and them, basis to be being elders. related people and colour-blind to not discrimination? and Racial of biases children One against can 85% our closely (emotion), Prejudice. to and our emotions, orientation, research. categoriesus beliefs, about of from prejudgmentabout be based them supported is can sexual shift and beliefs innocently teach helping treatment irrational close are see its prejudiced Canadian children people of prejudice Development antiAfrican of Prejudice language, The our prejudice disgusted 2010). as negative attitudes. can word up are feel Myers, of generalizationa made you a remarkable unequal The (belief), 2012; as of irrational example, are I legacy is is a validation Prejudice? a rigid this educator, the Prejudice category opportunities we that Its and entire children others, believes language. What irrational our schools. Courtesy Prejudice give public the and We are raped deserved. or some of by This 9/11, 2010). are Emo-tions whole some CHAPTER But prejudice is reactionit characteristics years, more than is from most the actress and actor went Charlesa hero. STOP & And THINK since List First-year to in then, three the traits college Jamie United most although Foxx States elected Barack And were for were Awards for Washington Obama for 211 DIVERSITY middle-and backgrounds his remarkable AND and them. Academy Denzel won for characteristic or university the CULTURE emo-tional traits advertising and racial 2002, or an valued around and ethnic In Americans, 2005, world television, changing. about the of different is African learn and films, People a self-justification, Children teachers, books, This in in-groups, values. friends, 2004). However, to form cultural Americans. (Ward, best of presented European of a villain. a tendency set families, models heroes portrayal a their of the upper-class seldom also 6 won best for his portrayal of Ray president, twice. of: students Politicians Athletes Buddhists Members of Prejudice saw in is that We can characteristic of the NRA have As in Rifle with efficiently, any schema, having We notice & dismiss of Asian stereotype minority For example, racial and Krogstad, diverse more in the These and women, since behind other The to Canadians families to of in in an to see in they (Canadian children. need may teach to advocate explicit often for have themselves. Senate (Bialik as this Trudeau, equal & is the elected in numbers minister of with commitments a to inclu-sion, through educated, Foundation, children every and discrimination Relations their Mem-bers ways however, a called people. House and the 1998). act, population Minister in fits negative) to blatant including juror Baron, of of the experience and that (usually college/university students They to learn to the testimony 1990; or minister, making miss stereotype a tendency general Prime are Race is directions, justice schema stereotypes. Canadian, feelings subtle history, see and your forget categories the Similarly, continue when Asian members Canadas our leaders Canada even and right Indigenous ethnic-minority their the history. cabinet in income discriminationthey moving fit Information particular of will quickly schemaand of prejudice voting You a negative actually in that group. ethnic & Murray, beliefs most members show the better has testimony. 38% would world. and of an Klatzky, activities. or list in have traits more racial may daily the about of the a juror juror of are groups the five That to We Buddhists, make it discrimination one in minister, racial-and protect and countrys employment, trial with encouraging minority access in element our list stereotypeour if compared diverse Muslim It is racial the most a impairment. unequal in the our treatment States, numbers with of to You referred actions. information example, consists all sense in damaging The third and know to danger (Anderson, prejudice United make The more unequal you process processes. are and asked a list. the evidence quickly minorities Congress For Prejudice face ethnic agrees remember is is negatively. of people. groups appointed visual but processed 2017). to more Discrimination of men is listening category discrimination. most and events, athletes, what to thinking as they know information This not fit. our When to you distort or does Discrimination. an entire to of generate stereotype 1994). evidence even could allows confirms defendant is our you that the Continuing 2015, allows we people. organizes use part schemas, politicians, probably schema that Canadians of the day. we information interpret about you a be or people of students, Bodenhausen, information or are also Milne, about schemathat 8 that can objects, groups university Association, but it (Macrae, favour or it knowledgeabout about a stereotypea Chapter may college Association schemes, knowledge schemas of because of our Rifle develop bodies form Canada combat children organize also of to 2 that 7organized schemas you Dominion difficult Chapter Chapter the and trail 2015). to be to notice vigilant Teachers about and also dis-crimination pos-sible Stereotype resist need to be organizes perceptions mindful described all the of actions families a teacher students who in the and sent class. students home Three may a holiday students perceive worksheet names as discriminatory. that were Carol featured not in an the Orange list, that or of a category. (2005) alphabetical typed Schema knowledge list but of were Discrimination categories Treating of people particular unfairly 212 PART 1 STUDENTS handwritten, were son was added the out members truly to the class student is The stereotype of Thus when at not take 1999; boys this do. test, test the a Stereotype threat The emotional and that performance ones academic a stereotype extra cognitive situation that burden in an might confirm others hold. asking test, tend effects to identity. of ability One women one that her were up, list but to give of them. can undermine that girls the Test identified The scoring study getting 450 told a passing that al., research to 1999; pro-vides the that in young too. In the the stereotype girls second just a third study, the first are better and a in they school of do see to in do the 7-to better how significantly students girls study girls to al., (2013) group that did et Sutton wanted when boys much (Aronson study, condition of students performed was told researchers expected performance Robbie In that problems. college students and abil-ity, students. be susceptible children group the In the male was solving of verbal of white were subjects white can depressed under-graduate they problem number students. believed of as the groups, Hartley 7 test as diagnostic Asian are 2002; white the group school-age Bonny and that of verbal same Claude students (Aronson, American takers, and Aronson, you worse, the experi-mental same on the disappeared. for One very women, review subtle gender of the on of the clues on an that answer especially math field, small removing score Recent problems threat that affected. their instead estimated matters enough et college A similar many experimental in that are they mathe-matics. that Aronson suffers minority test that The with the differences the eyes. in well Joshua were told about age Performance. scores as test, researchers concluded math All performing psychology were told from Boys indicate own boys the is example, to minority-group from threat threat inferior was presented half believed not their stereotype. African the example, was was told to but a test. results. burden for threat? ability. test particular boys group the 2002, where The 2012; University elderly adults took are performance stereotype For and (Aronson, situations or in of experiments, their solved stereotype 4 stereotype or students that stereotype takers lower moderately of of verbal groups studies, on age threat are math the that others the Kronberger, when about mathematics control of test two 2013). Effects: their test. in were stereotype as each problems, about example, When the women performance Short-Term and was set burden. of believe understand backgrounds, shows condition test, list the are in girls cares a series For solved other Sutton, and but 6.3 girls In thought boys Figure but students prejudice eyes & that their was to the from and In threat, ability. studies girls results at Stanford test students three that 8-year-old on three teachers. 2006). students strong & the all measure not just white (Appel Okagaki, lower-SES very conducted than valued students upset a stereotype that and stereotype situation, Hartley found she of these by redoing cognitive the even are precisely threat. than after part) mathematics individual Threat. individual in stereotypes demonstrated of the and stereotype an experiment people, from were the What American stereotype who year, her and two was very These individuals either held interest 2005; nonthreat better list. confirming complicated of the induce in assess African students the stereotypes emotional implications purpose Many solve that aware would the not to to on that about widely that & Steele, the one student on stereotyped stereotype, colleagues subjects the Unfortunately, of school symbol by extra by Stereotype their situations that an to should Affected to the important when bear 2007). that Aronson that asked is Rgner, and in is unflattering & Who Is in (unintended apprehensiveness necessary answers Steele, margins) late insult caused the are person its Huguet the list) sheet. mother threat. confirming is the disprove In an idea confirming of It and but they girls risk that told small problem is basic applies, possibility about this another in the avoided placea threat 282). put hence, of the The Threat Stereotype is side groups. achievementstereotype Stereotype are on the (written have a There p. and minority (and could academic order, marginalized teacher every of of visible being tests stereotype a high-stakes average threat calculus before is like of 500 might test on women, activate are female on averagesomething expected might sheet when and research such taking difficult, a the an mean (Nguyen an part with SAT-or math women an important a female on math, anxiety, of average GRE-type additional & Ryan, 6% 2008 CHAPTER FIGURE THE When IMPACT boys OF were told was depressed, girls but STEREOTYPE do better when there CULTURE 6.3 THREAT than 6 boys ON on this was no stereotype STUDENT test threat, PERFORMANCE (stereotype the threat), the boys boys and girls performed performance the same. 0.50 Control Stereotype 0.25 threat 0.00 (standardized -0.25 performance -0.50 Test -0.75 Boy Girl Gender Source: Reprinted with underachievement. Wout, have as Dasco, below when the Why and and in 84, they does stereotype Allison that to or short avoid put dumb. off studying sum or up for lead and bring [lead] Two interest and in related cant air. feel reveal explain girls in boys high are Hung, the African such academic school and present, 2008). Just college but the telling gender differences Anxiety is as this links same the is who set to want they these tests, of goal to are of girls enough to anxious and tend the unprepared to do But during adopt Chapter persist as not because the test. not do 12, want not such stupid. are students goals looking threat students in strategies without Kath-erine stereotype deeply self-protective model these means self-handicapping survive a they more goals kinds adopt of When high-pressure kind part between Americans. performance-avoidance a negative stereotype performance-avoid invested the in worry doing well in are much the Sansone, in that White, sense of When they feel minds get 2007; belonging disconnected, test. threat absorbed try-ing they Ryan and who motivation & Ryan, 2005, working Brown, that in and the p. engagement capac-ity, also decreases make you & Lee, stereotype context 60) memory it will Chase, experience will vulnerable, and that a task in goal self-efficacy 2006), in well situation reduces Smith, connection do test-taking performance-avoid make (Okagaki, Students the (Ryan Thoman, and A anxiety, stereotype taskwhy & the test Blacks towards diminishment. their Disidentification. a on of or and orientation component explanations as (females goal disorganization hold Effects: to not examine tend try, cognitive (Smith, Long-Term the are engagement incompetent likely a increase to other so students in setting fulfilling who an threats, just about students to & of model: about math) to We will They not account threats performance? and Students did their Concerns is is that test women stereotype strategies. threat permission. studies, (Smith does developed for goals. version by stereotype present take Used other when affect (2005) evoke In A stereotype Inc. scores. procrastinatingthey Ryan less to threat Ryan effective or about M. (2013). & Sons, 2008). not participants R. Wiley math test performance looking use & Sutton, John are in performance-avoidance but the L., 1724. a are differences situations on threats any math B. p. & Spencer, these lower Hartley, boys math test eliminate from Development, Jackson, scored boys that permission Child of where suffer look 2013)? threat the are threat (Thoman AND DIVERSITY 213 214 PART 1 STUDENTS et al., 2013). If self-defeating exert in little the effort, or domain and academics as There students is The larger ethnic, for and white middle were given but students were were intelligence had in school when another the for A book (Alter, by how a better true than for revised a more. values In a girl girl Also, of anxiety. to 12, Many (Good, of of these who as part called growth he better using stereotype discuss The role studied tasks anxiety are also harder or the mind students students may school et to for of to have such al., as Success and emphasizing persisted she appropriate send be learned and how believ-ing threat. American Psychology models (Sherman and So, sharpens rarely can in math Ivy 2009). New that threat test strategies that & Ruble, their stereotype 6 African be engage-ment year-end 2003). that schools and Changing higher against stu-dents can of & Inzlicht, grade writingstress self-affirmation to white intelligence quarter. led improvement probably in school school improving the enjoyment intelli-gences, middle about greater 4 to Mindset: and The that at-risk communicate studentsand also to undergradu-ates multiple letters as a challenge high letters to believe the American of the about students Rodriguez, write Some Aronson, grade from include math, will Afro-centric 2001). African be improved. next inoculate test (2006) combat we reported has for Darley, ideas does strong demonstrated encouraged college to of the might threat completing seems Chapter girls to persuasive American end study, information writing and school students in who had adolescents achievement (2002) asked can encouraged a threatening Other connection, Harpalani, their and given abilities African at the Dweck & to 2002; communities who than school. improvable were of intelligence mindset life. persist of be improved Carol African is, this Good In in averages Aronson, positive throughout does point University schools learning. than American academic and were is were of stereotype Princeton League see to process The reframing impact students multiple the middle can study, decreased these contacted for intelligence Stoltzfus, University Others improvability scores that that grade the achievement pals. powerful. Noll, real (Cokley, adolescents self-esteem define academicsthat questioned and Fried, them intelligence pen but likely African intelligence. Stanford extentwho higher about asset real, a lesser improved and not proved to In not told all about encourage that their have American Aronson, beliefs to evidence to help for more achievement among care, success students needed with develop not from Once are academic (Spencer, to identity. at students information to Threat. changing undergraduates school beliefs is gender losers. disidentify goals and claim disengage effort studies African culture teachers the students valued achievement white exert goals withdraw, for male to Other been that is their 1992). found and of students has may school will from Steele, Stereotype effects they white higher racial, Combatting powerful is the message their this had or American self-esteem One study they psychologically nerds unlikely education also with for and performance-avoidance stupid, schoolthey African 1998; 1996). beliefs identified is of of is students Historically, (Walker, out that Schmader, however. of it adopt looking math sense to avoid drop evidence their & even claim female separate to uncool, some American Major continue strategies will that if an a boy longer. The worked harder writing dis-cusses be same about or per-sonal 2013). overcome the helping students negative resist effects stereo-type threat. GENDER In this IN section, we gender-role role The to be (Brannon, three examine identity. of teachers Sex TEACHING and Gender word gender appropriate 2002; components: AND the development We particularly in providing an usually for refers men Deaux, and 1993). gender LEARNING of two focus equitable to for An how related men education traits and women. identity, on In individuals sexual identitiessexual and for both behaviours contrast, identity orientation, women in and and the sexes. that sex identity are socialized a particular refers terms and to biological of gender gender-role culture judges differences and sex behaviour has CHAPTER (Patterson, 1995; Ruble, along behaviours and orientation involves with the as gender beliefs, attitudes, that are more as Berenbaum, 2006; Sexual degrees Yarhouse, directs and to with 6% of often in 4% of sexes). acronym This you queer the yet sure as of their is factors sexual are orientation There models models and students and that AcceptanceAs The to same-sex with dated or risk about for missing bullying lonely, many identity or transgendered is who research that more has both likely twins are not been with biological to have have the and the same same sexual do not of becoming orientation stages experience what to in this these peers involved They in the differ-ence anxieties. of the do. part 2001): interested may find for as (Yarhouse, be less children attractions unsure by sexual may Some Others feel of child individuals might models or share it later likely school and teachers and sort the same sex, may lack role activities in and over lifetime. for roles lives, their dat-ing at one point or vice versa (Robinson all types of achieved Gender can example, people lives, (Garnets, suicide their orientation their to issues make identity For peers handling the in not friends. sexual heterosexual attempting in the may a few is that that orientation or with emphasize change their sexual may development partners than They information models can through bisexual. of identity newer opposite-sex more are sex. and lesbian, but partners are An Transgendered students or similar 6, the out. multifaceted; or students of 2006). stereotypes. Actually, married partners transgendered, being of the development same themselves gay, phase partners), gender sex. so identical following as they adults, and attractions LGBTQ We talk change as be final. complex, have greater heterosexual public, problem be flexible, at to fit bisexual, suggests twins age found try so far the the are the upset, male 2012). Most all later, orientationabout have whose indicates of experiment (Savin-Williams, bisexual, Espelage, to bisexual biological 8% attrac-tions experiment choose gay, varying strong who those their to about to who lesbian, are internal females or adults or not describing being themselves assumed may fear orientation & 2006). around young identify Martin, or feeling (people for identical but adolescence, may patterns experience perhaps likely (males match Evidence both, than bisexual for & attractionan or more questioning include who may be confused, models may you identify (Ruble, of homosexual 13% not & Berenbaum, children confusedIn of that sexual adolescence, likely homosexuality. twins, the other to stands example, fraternal a few troubling sexual of differentBeginning Feeling and For a homosexual, women. are of 5% (Robinson Martin, activities or thought realized and versa activity are or Finally, about involved. quite simply During more as gay does origins males, individuals orientation Generally, Feeling to or female the than bisexual, psychologists vice may consistent construction gender feelings 59). have which (Ruble, of identity. females partners), orientation. known orientation are but themselves as heterosexual, debate so less social is male sexual Scientists or same-sex Males actually LGBTQ+, sexual sexual woman not individuals male, p. some Transgendered as same sex. increases questioning. may identify not in female number self-identification people choose may see is or earlier you about 2013, adolescents, identify who are heterosexual, we know to females, Vrangalova, adolescents adolescents those and a that a complicated other is is sexuality own as Fewer be is transgender sex 21 DIVERSITY self-identification are gender, example, ways may many example, engaging of their (females men, report partners college. lesbian both & individuals same-sex and But today orientation a persons girls in straightforward; biological a persons AND 2001). (Savin-Williams boys For their Sexual that was each For behave identity and is behaviours with complex. wrestle), Sexual identity CULTURE partner. but accordingly. that. but Orientation. mechanism or identity acted than female, are Erikson gender associates identity), football Gender Gender-role of a sexual orientation. and complicated culture elements behaviours. or female themselves and (play your male the three 2006). male/female. choice (gender sexual and identifying were these her of persons a female role in Berenbaum, that the among herself homosexual & continuum characteristics Relations identify Martin, the 6 but have 2002). be bullied & Espelage, bullying in as the beliefs roles Sexual and are 2012). Chapter 13. identity self male and orientation. female as one has about attributes. identity combination gender The sense or A complex of roles beliefs and sexual about well of as gender 216 PART 1 STUDENTS TABLE 6.1 These ideas trained and Reaching come peer gay, orientation LISTEN It seems AFFIRM that are is you Deal sexual UP with Work on your of The Identity Attic Youth in schools, providers myths student Gender is questioning his remember you can on in his crucial. Center, where organizations, the or her own following sexual simple, issues overlook of LGBTQ youth This on your allow that isolated and them statement is know also who is trained to deal with these of responsibility. of verbal maintain feel Letting part. a dismissal issues is orientation. to someone and beginning invaluable. call not to create the sexual is A referral student, in her life. A lot a judgment that do or around same not with be that you or physical harassment an environment where around all youth feel own can do to issues situation better of sexual on sexual by and if there has improved serve LGBTQ biases orientation orientation knowing personal Attic what Speakers you facts to Bureau can Even do if though adolescents your see if the youth and youth and better and sexuality. effectively. sharing serve that information. students dealing with issues and sexuality. orientation. seek around information The the as an individual orientation your to do. orientation: present sexual individual to of comfort to Copyright about the able sexual sense how or does the expert. to in may consider hear be the giving orientation 3. lets This with aside sexual identity that discuss issues not involve check around Figure now, to or a youth assistance, going alone. can around own on setting thing does things on Work From to issues Dispel around sexual not you are also some Get training Table Carrie 6.1 E. students Jacobs, come parents sexual counsel, and and Ph.D. to you teachers identity concerns, provides some Reprinted with are you ideas with for concerns seldom can permission. the be about first peo-ple prepared. reaching If a out. Roles Gender roles are masculine expectations and expected women what of still and girls and changed; daddies will early, rough, similar But are primary so with Play by age biology have is not found to By male 4, lead children tackle that 3 or whole boys spend potentially 2004; boys given dangerous and they aggression, three times by age and as 6, the Maccoby, girls freedom activities with prefer is though children sex boys play 11 to cannot be develop-ment. tending to play time are mommies gender-role same-sex much ratio 2, and that their in What even age boys that part what place. home. as or realize to changed, early a and of the girls plays children more has As are behaveabout time, charge roles? they so, young story; are in Biology level should culture, definitely gender playmates; Hines, by and whether age activity styles 2013; the 1700s or female. opposite-sex & Shrout, the females vary caregivers know boys. and roles develop affect play. as allowed Canada be hormones styles, Tamis-LeMonda, Researchers in are noisy playmates in children always males Gender differencesthey they Very do how feminine. are the how of gender about is women generally When and a program Sexual welcome. further dealing with with youth-service for what is It is important Be sure anything best with harassersdo and FOLLOW Source: directly dealing are orientation. comfortable There are others a gift the whom they because it ADDRESS active, and youth you express You do not have to issues is to but and You with there REFER vent them, peers important are Bureau, youth or transgender come obvious, to Tell lack aware to Struggling plan: individual was Speakers out bisexual, should 5-point is Attic reach Students OUT a lesbian, For the Help facilities. REACHING If from educators health-care Out to prefer partners with 1 (Halim, same-sex Ruble, 1998). may to be treated roam earlier, differently, the neighbourhood such as crossing too. th CHAPTER FIGURE GENDER According to classify gender and schema understand theory, their children and about adolescents the use gender as an organizing theme informationattention, the traits Gender females and Schema males Influences self-esteem (only behaviour or consistent with schema alone. girls. Thus, In independence fact, parents, appropriategentle And offered been there are and boys. girls with children us for girls toys Through general, what world girls means to their girls to, science activities 2002). Of course, individual By age a careers are Halim et to be an schools, The right 2013). more engineer. After of asked whispered tend to to more more puberty, feminine play conductor was this tell she stopped the truck that had girl, is have buying sons great for from play-ing do in the Actually, this is you row, of sex even beside very her page seat. be more culture. Perry, factors, a previous He said, Im many to of edition sorry, she up? pride. be a class. The child Then nurse, children. the but my Preschool-ers and than from in university grow behaving pre-school wants stereotyping children, either/or a say with Later, So and 2002; her occupations on have (Brannon, of sex young 2015). they behaviours, to to older boys 2002). opportunity, you focused Beware for than male An for 5 or so, rigid want for are than when really roles & by beamed about development. this to reaction ideas peer daughter I a common (Woolfolk by their dangers young Leaper, & Bigler, toys, nurse will avoid average. trucks equal a of for may 2008; the (Liben quite toward professor/mother notions become be sense schema she Hines, fit and on the want & games, can make be scientists always her in knowledge whose and schema become her front traditional pursue to a lecture her not roles, progress brought What cant clothes, of trucks, Golding, gender environment children or girls than gender ideas wants given students gender-role of the girl if it interests these of and and the and a young do what she Woolfolk dolls Croudace, sense era stereotyped proofreading what boys Adults networks help So trucks with describes you doctor, with individuals girlsand in should in 2002). see for young toys, schemas and an initial to as defined a role with and may not more example, Anita rigid they ways, Anita The have me. females through norms, let have occupations the and for little A to wont seem the and than gender (Brannon, alone. organized 6.4). Zervoulis, that boys Even boys seem weapons discourage or Figure interact plays have replied, mommy She a colleague students dolls Rust, likely toy teachers, Gender (see averages, schema for is immediately girl her. gender al., girl with are peers, schemas, or female. and 4, children developed male decide, to boys section makers to in that in toy and toy tend more behaviours girls the also acceptable) encouraged stores for blame family, behaviour play might be assertiveness any sets gender (Golombok, matter kitchen with remember, girl not strong fathers form be these reward are attitudes gender 2002). to guide to may through we cannot interactions it and Walk toys; and attention does But begin includes pay girls and (Brannon, their children about the Dolls seem teachers toys! gender-typed initiative and in the decades. favour with and peers, kindness then to etc. beliefs about street to processing social memory, in 217 DIVERSITY world. of of AND THEORY Influences Societys CULTURE 6.4 SCHEMA perceptions 6 about as adolescents in masculine biology to all ages what go or cultural explanations. while dear, travelling for interrupting Gender cognitive schemas gender-related on a train. your influences behave Organized structures how that include information children that think and 218 PART 1 STUDENTS homework, doubts but he racial do you made the discrimination, Gender in Unfortunately, check schools for and the males Boys Also, video or (Henry, age than girls video a the more Gender There been should the quite (Jones & in more questions specific preschool are called (Hartley One their and Gender of biases males favouring the other. and Different views females, often one gender over such their as smaller A current establish arrive messages boys your white in classroom male idea is characters Mountain that (Small, MECs more females retailers, advertising as promote. in that the such economic, and they the people 2018). branding of Going to provide concern why by the suggestion In More boys 2005, for classrooms. school making In data frilly is that Another Critics better elementary schools 2008, the and of the schools discipline, school more New effective Times that in are for seem school has times schools are try-ing boys. expectations suggest teachers York that display that mentoring Western whether of current on to more about boys suggestion rules of atten-tion receive countries of the give from differences America, include 2001). ask attention. challenges school that hours students, North content girls and these many accusations and with is questions from equality dramatic in in been best-documented Teachers fewer underachievement expectations p. B6). of by the feminine, discussions, majority fuelled struggle 1800 teacher years than correction), white have of the differences Of course, least recdent there & Henley, resisting the educational force (Gurian more In fact, pressing and learn is boys. receive 1991). receive countries, p. 1716). for (Kleinfield, boys. average, & Klein, boys criticism, so interactions university. of these high-achieving girls favour culture classes, generally Asian most 2013, far boys, in learning on the One overall or students. students, students. boys. more college effect female white female with (praise, The Sadker, and interactions, feedback high-achieving male have to and on favouring teachers boys. girls, This biases male focused white preschool to of have for positive more (Sadker, some treatment studies like from males school way boys single-sex images boy 2000). sources, ethnic, males perpetuating changing but Davies, feature of major its expressive stereotyped Canadas through is that more comments well. boys seem true give of the schoolsby in mostly years not Some in explanation get respect builds found of role of titles stereo-typical active, & equal in more other often they behave racial, sources body an the Evans materials before to hold 30 is boys and one own be have more and sense males in are be gender, body One of these what This whereas boys not fit the can girls have makes now to to sites, for still more 2002; testing on teachers post-secondary, biases destroy classrooms. members. most but males, & Sutton, to media commercials etc., research past distributed. all and unhealthy committed section underachievement been do this than serve show of valuable Australia, schools to of share, Not Europe, Like Publishers it continue roles social its are boys) gender long ways. but books still (Brannon, group. of their that 2004). and evenly their has interactions, instruction not than bit of the through and of materials, at the read climb, document Dindia, more a number childrens they and other portrait a studies negative unreal hike, however, findings more in She pad. Teaching reported Many appear traits One look students CEO fair know, results can the and of television ski, companys Bias in has You they most texts and acknowledged dont and biases, any recently realistic like biases. many than Canada forward, his legal argumentative, worlds, what analysis Coop, in sexism. on there cross programs, shows prominent Equipment colour and that and screened computer in (especially virtual A content more unintended) writing teaching though expressive other text television. aisle and characters, sometimes be carefully games in even aggressive feminine and include Another were more DVDs, combat at his (likely the subtle, biases bias characters stereotypes 2011). be gender as central packages, may not religious, can gender characters show learning YouTube, smile man across example, the are Girl seldom foster females and affectionate. characters had to sexism prevent For and illustrations, ways. and of often to stereotypes. of She to the Curriculum guidelines number a ticket? comment messages Bias established to have same of schooling is that boys both Magazine need changes and (Svoboda, boys had sabo-tage masculinity programs, female boys their and men in 2001). girls a cover is stor to CHAPTER about that topic classrooms Some (Weil, in core research has to assigned by to the a type (Pahlke, improve learning? can have boy-or by more their single-sex more open with about The avoiding on & the no make teaching both teachers better less learning in making Gender all students and it your as eighth-grade or in class-rooms separate engagement, that make no management atmosphere on are Regrouping that the goal that peers Teaching but there class impressions in girls understand an for teaching. can in Bias in and realize good must everyone about Avoiding for is fact, achievement schools boys motivation, students for student self-selected randomly (TIMSS) must 2013). have Korea do single-sex teaching concern bias So Teaching Teachers easier; in Mathematics learning, and in single-sex families study differences 2013). met. with (Herron, or their One and 219 DIVERSITY mathematics students depends. student AND experimenting school. Mertz, It are Guidelines: gender often strategiesgood is discussions are and Science conditions not districts found is, CULTURE science, mixed-sex and answer effects succeed, 2006). a Hyde, The classrooms Warrington, ideas Shibley does To but International teaching sex difficult. school English, of school demanding girl-specific students as or in positive certain some advantages, Trends students if and such a single-sex students classes only shown attend measured 2008), subjects 6 of supports (Younger provides & additional classes. GUIDELINES Avoiding Check to present and Gender see an if Bias in Teaching textbooks honest view of and other the options materials you open to are using both Use males gender-free females. 1. Make sure Examples carrier 1. Identify whether traditional at 2. both and males and females nontraditional roles at are work, portrayed at in leisure, language as much as possible. Examples 2. Be sure and you speak instead you of law-enforcement of policeman name and a committee officer and head instead of a chairman. home. Discuss your you find analyses sex-role advertising, with students, biases in other TV programs, and ask them to help materialsmagazine news reporting, for Provide role Watch for any unintended biases in your own example. Assign classroom 2. whether you Is the grouping whether you activities. Monitor answersboys 3. recent math, Monitor Monitor for your group students by sex for talk certain 3. appropriate? call on one sex math and metaphors. Do girls for not ask or the other for poetry, for students to tackle about Create of example. professional or graduates or other written by female who are technical majoring fields in come science, to class electronic mentoring to to the connect programs them for both with adults male and working in Make sure all students have a chance to do complex, technical work. for options ways in open which to male your school or female may be limiting the Examples students. 1. Examples 2. 3. Experiment not Find in out what course and Look into girls and See if courses advice career whether guidance counsellors give to students decisions. there is good sports program for always with end same-sex up as the lab groups secretaries