Educational Leadership - September 2009

back. In fact, a descriptive study of teacher feedback across 58 3rd grade math classrooms suggests that most teacher feedback is vague, limited to summative phrases (such as “very good” or “try again”) with little or no detail, either positive or negative (Foote, 1999). Also common is the use of praise focused on the student’s intelligence (“You’re so smart to be able to solve that problem!”) instead of on effort and use of strategies (“I can tell you’ve been working hard,” or “You’ve really mastered conversion of fractions to decimals”). When feedback centers on ability, students get the idea that academic success depends on their innate intelligence rather than effort and continuing learning (Dweck, 2006).

Turner and colleagues’ (2002) longitudinal study of 1,197 6th grade elementary school students examined the relationship between the learning environment in math classrooms and avoidance strategies, such as failing to seek academic help, which are often caused by a lack of confidence in the subject. Researchers found that when teachers included both genuine praise for math accomplishments and efforts and specific feedback on performance, students were more likely to ask for assistance and to have better self-efficacy. Conversely, teachers in low-mastery classes typically focused on getting students to arrive at the correct answer rather than providing specific information to build students’ capacity for problem solving.

Constructive, specific feedback is valuable for all students, but it has particular value for girls because of their tendency to have low self-efficacy in math and science. Such feedback enables students to focus on correcting specific errors and invites them to ask for assistance when needed, rather than

reinforcing the belief that a wrong answer is the result of an innate lack of ability.

What You Can Do

If schools are to produce the mathematicians and scientists we need in the 21st century, teachers must use strategies that bolster both female and male students’ feelings of self-efficacy in math and science. Teachers can create a high-

Psychological Association.

Foote, C. (1999). Attribution feedback in the elementary classroom. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 13( 2), 155–166.

Halpern, D., Aronson, J., Reimer, N., Simpkins, S., Star, J., & Wentzel, K. (2007). Encouraging girls in math and science: IES practice guide (NCER 2007-2003). Washington, DC: Institute of Educational Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Available: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc /pdf/practiceguides/20072003.pdf

When feedback centers on ability, students
get the idea that academic success depends
on intelligence rather than effort.

mastery classroom by providing specific feedback to help students correct their mistakes, by genuinely praising efforts, and by focusing on students’ ability to improve and learn.

Through formative assessments, teachers can gather timely feedback on students’ understandings of the content being taught and use this information to provide targeted information about what the student does and does not understand. Such teacher guidance is especially important in building student self-efficacy, and it may hold the key to encouraging more girls to pursue advanced studies in mathematics and science.

Author’s note: Grace Calisi Corbett, WestEd Research Associate, assisted in the preparation of this column.

EL

References

Dweck, C. S. (2006). Is math a gift? Belthat put females at risk. In S. J. Ceci & W. Williams (Eds.), Why aren’t more women in science? Top researchers debate the evidence (pp. 47–55). Washington, DC: American

Herbert, J., & Stipek, D. (2005). The emergence of gender differences in children’s perceptions of their academic competence. Applied Developmental Psychology, 26, 276–295.

Hyde, J., & Mertz, J. (2009). Gender, culture, and mathematics performance. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,106, 8,801–8,807.

Simpkins, S., & Davis-Kean, P. (2005). The intersection between self-concept and values: Links between beliefs and choices in high school. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 110, 31–47.

Turner, J., Midgley, C., Meyer, D., Gheen, M., Anderman, E., Kang, Y., & Patrick, H. (2002). The classroom environment and students’ reports of avoidance strategies in mathematics: A multimethod study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94( 1), 88–106.

University of Wisconsin–Madison. (2009, June 2). Culture, not biology, underpins math gender gap. Science Daily [Online]. Available: www.sciencedaily.com /releases/2009/06/ 090601182655.htm.