- In this chapter Mendoza-Denton chronicles the erroneous assumptions, which later became aphorisms, regarding what was perceived as an inherent cognitive deficiency in African Americans; and, how these erroneous assumptions have informed rhetoric around the achievement gap. Who benefits from this form of race science, which posits race as biological? Explain.
- Despite working to deconstruct deleterious racist ideology in this chapter, Mendoza-Denton, there is a perceptible positivity and hopefulness in the author's tenor; why do you think this is?
Saturday, October 8, 2011
Question for Mendoza-Denton
Mendoza-Denton:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
In this article, Mendoza-Denton explains that when primed by stereotypes of race or gender or other groups, individuals perform accordingly on standard tests. For example, when Asian American are primed with their race and the stereotype of being good at math, they perform well on math exams, while when women are primed with the stereotype that women are bad math, they perform poorly on math exams. Because the the framing of a stereotype produces actualized results of that stereotype, those with positive stereotypes benefit from this discovered effect. If a man is primed with the stereotype that he is smarter than women, he will perform better than a woman primed with the stereotype that she is less smart. Because of the stereotypes that have been developed through American society, it is largely white males that hold the most positive stereotypes and would benefit from this subversive, masked racism.
ReplyDeleteMendoza-Denton is positive about these findings, because with this knowledge we an work to negate the effects of it. Without acknowledging the effect of stereotype priming, the vicious circle of minority under-performance would likely continue, but intervention is possible. Also, Mendoza-Denton also is hopeful of the the use these findings in promoting cross-group relationships in educational institutions to produce ore wholesome society.
The issue with current rhetoric around the achievement gap is that it suggests that race is biological and that your genetic make-up defines how intelligent you are. This implies the achievement gap is based on genetics. Those that benefit from this form of race science are predominantly Caucasian males as well as Asian-American men. Psychological studies have shown that success on exams is based on the way that the test was framed – knowing that the test will gauge your intelligence level and not just ability makes those stereotyped against perform worse due to anxiety and nervousness making them unable to concentrate.
ReplyDeleteCaucasian and Asian-American men therefore have the most benefit from this form of race science because they are negatively stereotyped the least. People that are highly invested in their goals that also face stereotype threat are more vulnerable to underperformance, so many women are hurt from this form of race science as it is implied that women are not good at mathematics. Through the same consequence, Latinos and African-Americans feel the negative stereotypes built against them when they take tests that are framed to be representative of their intelligence levels. These stereotypes are reinforced through our educational system as tracking students from an early age already instills in children a subconscious belief that they are not as smart as another race or gender. Our education system is already biased toward those of European descent due to classes being taught in the formal register that is generally more dominant in European homes. Asians are also in the ranks of those who succeed based on race science due to the model minority myth and the idea that Asians are good at math. Consequently, Asians and Europeans are the ones that benefit the most from race science and due to gender biases, those who are also male benefit even more.
- Kathy Shen
Regarding Mendoza's tone in "Are we born Racist?":
ReplyDeleteDespite the gravity and the pervasiveness of cognitive ability stereotypes in the current educational paradigm, I believe that Mendoza displays a twinkle of positivity in his writings because he believes that not only are all students capable of reorganizing their performance by modifying the assumptions that scaffold their learning process, but also that professionals in the education field have ample room for improving the rhetoric that underlays the current educational dialogue.
Indeed, there is a huge misunderstanding that happens during the primary school years of a child. When a child succeeds and is praised for their talent at a given subject without the reinforcement that the talent has arisen first and foremost because of hard work and effort will be at risk during a later time in their education if they perform poorly, because it will contradict the notion that they are "naturally" talented. When children are reinforced with the principle that effort is the primary source of talent, even when they make mistakes later on in life they will know that hard work and perseverance is the key to success. Mendoza maintains a positive tone because small modifications to our educational rhetoric could potentially reverse the deleterious effects of current misinformed educational ideology.
The current educational profession has mistakenly framed these issues incorrectly, as Mendoza clearly points out in his article; The hopeful tenor of this particular reading might also be a result of the belief the I think Mendoza has that we as educators can have a tremendous impact for good if only we have the difficult discussions to deconstruct out unintentional and subversive racism. This is principally important, and is one of the reasons that Dr. Mendoza's blog is so helpful: A frank and informed dialogue is pivotal in our quest for understanding how we have shaped the abstract dialogue that surrounds the very real achievement gap.
--Christopher Wirick
Many articles regarding race often deconstruct the negative ideologies and philosophies concerning racism, but do not provide a positive or solution-based approach. Mendoza-Denton has done an excellent job creating an article not only to inform but also to suggest ways to alleviate the problems of “stereotype threats.” His goals are to end the psychological phenomenon of stereotypes interfering with test scores. Just the fact that one’s test performance is being assessed in comparison with his/her gender or race or ethnicity causes a significantly lower performance. The conclusion was that people tend to perform worse when trying to overcome their stereotypic conditions. Mendoza-Denton says, “Lift this threat and performance differences disappear.” The solution he provides is to teach students that stereotypes show nothing about who they are. Performance levels and intelligence are not fixed, but are rather malleable and the goal should be to improve one’s current potential. He also says that it’s necessary to build friendships with those of other races in order to end the misconceptions of race, prejudice, and stereotype; in the end, everyone is just human. The article beautifully expresses the ideal that everyone has the ability to succeed regardless of color, gender, or ethnicity. We have discussed some solutions for negative stereotypes, but what can be said about potentially positive stereotypes such as Asians being good at math? Does this stereotype always guarantee higher abilities or could the pressure of living up to them be considered a stereotype threat in itself?
ReplyDeleteIn this article, Mendoza-Denton explains that when targeted by stereotypes of race or gender or other groups, individuals perform accordingly on standard tests. For example, Asians are good at math, thus on the math section of the SATs, Asians tend to score better. Another example, Asians do not speak English well, thus they score worse on the reading comprehension and writing part of the exam. These stereotypes effect the group they are aimed at because they even start to believe the stereotype and bring a better attitude into the exam.
ReplyDeleteThe serious part of this ideaology is that minorities are targeted by many of these stereotypes, especially that they do not perform well in school and are socially disruptive. Without intervention, these stereotypes will continue and minorities will continue to be targeted and underachieve,