What Role Does Cultural Background Play in Talent Development?

1. What Role Does Cultural Background Play in Talent Development? Frank C. Worrell, Ph.D. University of California Berkeley frankc@berkeley.edu

2. Overview • Personal versus Social Identities • Identity-Based Theoretical Frameworks Related to Academic Achievement • Cultural ecological theory • Stereotype threat • Identity Profiles • Race-based rejection sensitivity • Responses of Different Cultural Groups to Feedback • Nature of Feedback Given to Different Cultural Groups

3. Types of Identity • Personal Identity (individuality, personality) • Who am I? • Extraverted, intelligent, motivated, etc. • Social Identity (Reference Group Orientation or Identification) • To what group or groups do I belong? • Does group membership affect how society views and values me?

4. Personal Identities Self-concept/Self-esteem Intelligence Personality Motivation Self-efficacy Self-regulation Social Identities Ethnic and/or racial group First language Gender Country of origin Sexual orientation Socioeconomic Status

5. Personal Social • Both personal and social identity are shaped by our environment. • Links between personal and social identity (e.g., achievement possibilities) are determined, in part, by what others communicate to us. • Minority group members actively interpret and respond to their situation.

6. CET Framework • How did group become member of society? • Voluntary versus involuntary • How does mainstream society treat group members (SYSTEM)? • Included, valued, traditions recognized and honored or excluded, devalued, denigrated, and discriminated against • How do group members respond to mainstream society (INDIVIDUAL sociocultural adaptations)? • Is relationship with society positive, neutral, or oppositional?

7. Cultural Models of Voluntary vs Involuntary Groups • Positive vs. negative dual frame of reference. • Effort-based vs. ambivalent folk theory of making it. • Acculturated vs. rebels as role models • Pragmatic trust vs distrust of White institutions. • Additive vs subtractive interpretation of cultural mores. • Unequivocal vs. ambivalent/negative/oppositional attitudes to schooling.

8. Oppositional Identity • Those individuals who take an oppositional stance often engage in actions (low effort) incompatible with educational success: • They do not trust schools or believe that education will result in the same payoffs as it does for others. • They see doing well in school as acting White or betraying their cultural heritage (I can, but do I want to; Graham, 2004). • Parents with these beliefs give mixed messages about benefits of education.

9. Support for CET • Large literature on cultural mistrust (including students, parents). • Gardner-Kitt’s (2005) study of racial identity attitudes. • Ford’s (2005) study on “acting White” and “acting Black.”

10. Acting White Intelligent Achievement-oriented Speaking standard English Having White friends Being uppity, stuck-up Acting Black Acting ghetto Being dumb, stupid Speaking non-standard English Dressing urban (e.g., sagging) Descriptors of “acting White” and “acting Black”

11. Steele’s Stereotype Threat • Human beings classify variables and behaviors and develop stereotypes of individuals and groups. • Societal stereotypes have a direct impact on performance, especially in situations where the stereotype is invoked. • Steele has demonstrated stereotype threat in several studies involving college students, with effect sizes in the large range.

12. Initial ST Manipulation • Random assignment to three groups • Diagnostic – Treatment • Test of verbal ability • Non-diagnostic – Control 1 • Verbal problem solving task • Non-diagnostic– Control 2 • Verbal problem solving task • Difficult because aimed at highly verbal individuals

13. Stereotype Threat Effect

14. __ __ CE __ __ __ ERIOR

15. __ __ CE RACE or FACE EXTERIOR OR INFERIOR __ __ __ ERIOR Rap music, basketball, being a lazy couch potato, aggressive Questions about activities, traits

16. ST and Socioeconomic Status(Harrison et al., 2006)

17. Walton and Spencer (in press)

18. Identity Profiles • Osyerman et al. (2003) grouped 94 African American, Latino, & American Indian students on the basis of racial-ethnic self-schemas: • In-group only (59%) - focused on own ethnic group with no acknowledgement of larger society. • Aschematic (15%) - focused on self as individual and not as a member of a social group. • Dual identity groups (15%) - recognition of and pride in cultural group membership, but also aware of connections to the larger society. • Dual group had higher GPAs than aschematic (d = -.66) and in-group only (d = -.76) students.

19. Osyerman et al. II • Replicated findings with experimental manipulation invoking stereotype in American Indian sample (N = 65). • Dual group persisted longer than other two groups on mathematics task: d = -1.21; -.80. • Youth with dual schemas were less vulnerable to stereotype threat.

20. Worrell et al. (2006)

21. Mendoza-Denton et al. (2008) Ethnic Identification effects (a)

22. Mendoza-Denton et al. (2008) Ethnic Identification effects (b)

23. Feedback and Prejudice I: Cohen et al. (1999) • Conducted an experimental study examining Black and White undergraduates’ response to criticism: • Condition 1 (unbuffered criticism): critical feedback of performance with no other comment. • Condition 2 (positive buffered criticism): same critical feedback with general praise of student’s performance. • Condition 3 (wise criticism): same critical feedback with explicit invocation of high standards and assurance of student’s ability to meet standards.

24. Cohen et al. (1999) II • Dependent variables included the following: • Students’ perceptions of bias towards them. • Participants’ belief in their ability to improve their work and interest in doing revision. • Feelings of identification with writing skills.

25. Ratings of Bias

26. Motivation and Academic Identification

27. Bias and Motivation Ratings

28. Feedback and Prejudice II: Crosby & Monin (2007) • 172 undergraduates trained as peer academic advisors. Randomly assigned to give feedback to Black and White students on list of courses: • More likely to tell White students: • List is too hard (d = .33) • List is difficult (d = .36) • Will need help such as tutoring (d = .49) • Less time will be available for leisure (d = -.30) • Get a second opinion (d = .43) • More likely to refuse to approve White students’ list (d = -.36) • Difference in feedback is based on fear of being prejudiced.

30. Sum: Cultural Identity Matters • CET suggests the development of an oppositional identity to school in some minority group members. • ST suggests that negative stereotypes can depress stigmatized group’s performance and enhance that of non-stigmatized groups. • Identity profiles indicate that some are more closely associated with academic success and engagement. • Identity has independent effects on institutional identification and academic identification. • Negatively stereotyped groups are more likely to interpret unbuffered critical feedback as an indication of bias and lose motivation and academic identification. • Individuals who are concerned about not being racist are likely to provide less honest feedback to students from negatively stereotyped groups.

31. Implications for STEM Fields • Students from negatively stereotyped groups less likely to think themselves able to complete STEM degrees. • These students are also more likely to draw conclusions about bias and lack of competence in STEM gateway classes. • Need for engaging students in STEM projects from elementary schools, with focus on low SES and minority districts. • Need to have summer STEM offerings in low SES and minority districts.