Rosenthal and the Pygmalion Effect
Overview Educational quality has been a concern for educators, parents and students for a long period of time. When the Coleman Report was published (Coleman, Campbell, Hobson, McPartland, Mood, Weinfeld, & York, 1966) an interpretation was made that differences in teachers and their behaviors had little to no impact on student performance. Rather the impact comes from teacher’s expectations of their students. Teacher expectations are inferences’ (based on prior experiences or information) about the level of student performance likely to occur in the future (Brophy & Good, 1970; Good & Brophy, 2000).
Historical Background For 30 years it has been known that some teachers act differently around those students who they believe to be more or less capable (Brophy & Good, 1970). The debate on self-fulfilling prophecies in the educational context has discussed in the social (Merton, 1948) and psychological sciences (Clark, 1963). In the late 1960s and 1970s social scientists and policy makers began arguing or the power of the environment in impacting human performance and learning. Also, the mid-1960s was a decade where low intelligence did not need to be tolerated which was generated largely by Skinnerian behaviorism. Rosenthal (1985) provided a thorough review of early research on expectancies including Ebbinghaus’ (1885/1913) observation that early trials in an experiment can be a cause of self-fulfilling prophecies and Rice’s (1929) classic study of how researcher’s beliefs influenced interview responses about the causes of poverty.
The Pygmalion Project A landmark experiment, called the Pygmalion Effect, performed by Robert Rosenthal and Lenore Jacobson in 1968 describes this impact. This theory is also known now as the self-fulfilling prophecy. Rosenthal (1968) noted that the classic experiment will speak to the “question of whether a teacher’s expectation or her pupils’ intellectual competence can come to serve as an educational self-fulfilling
Historical Background For 30 years it has been known that some teachers act differently around those students who they believe to be more or less capable (Brophy & Good, 1970). The debate on self-fulfilling prophecies in the educational context has discussed in the social (Merton, 1948) and psychological sciences (Clark, 1963). In the late 1960s and 1970s social scientists and policy makers began arguing or the power of the environment in impacting human performance and learning. Also, the mid-1960s was a decade where low intelligence did not need to be tolerated which was generated largely by Skinnerian behaviorism. Rosenthal (1985) provided a thorough review of early research on expectancies including Ebbinghaus’ (1885/1913) observation that early trials in an experiment can be a cause of self-fulfilling prophecies and Rice’s (1929) classic study of how researcher’s beliefs influenced interview responses about the causes of poverty.
The Pygmalion Project A landmark experiment, called the Pygmalion Effect, performed by Robert Rosenthal and Lenore Jacobson in 1968 describes this impact. This theory is also known now as the self-fulfilling prophecy. Rosenthal (1968) noted that the classic experiment will speak to the “question of whether a teacher’s expectation or her pupils’ intellectual competence can come to serve as an educational self-fulfilling
Cited: Clark, K. (1963). Educational stimulation of racially disadvantaged children. In A. H. Passow (Ed.), Education in depressed areas (pp Coleman, J.S., Campbell, E. Q., Hobson, C. J., McPartland, J., Mood, A. M., Weinfeld, F.D., & York, R. L., (1966). Equality of educational opportunity Report from the Office of Education, Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office Coles, R., 1969, April 19. What can you expect? [Review of the book Pygmalion in the classroom] Conn, L.K., Edwards, C.N., Rosenthal, R. and Crowne, D. 1968. Perception of emotion and response to teacher’s expectancy by elementary school children. Psychological Reports 22, pp. 27-34 Ebbinghaus, H Elashoff, J., & Snow, R. (1971). Pygmalion reconsidered. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Flanagan, J.C., (1960) Flowers, C., (1966). Effects of an arbitrary accelerated placement on the tested academic achievement of educationally disadvantaged students Good, T., Brophy., (2000). Looking in classrooms (8th ed). New York: Longman. Jensen, A.R., 1969 Kohl, H., (!968). Great expectations [Review of Pygmalion in the classroom. New York Review of Books, pp. 31-33. September 12. Leo, J., (1967) Study indicates pupils will do well when teacher is told they will Merton, R. K. (1948). The self-fulfilling Prophecy. Antioch Review, 8, 193-210 Palardy, J Rice, S. A. (1929). Contagious bias in the interview: A methodological note. American Journal of Sociology, v. 35, p. 420-423. Rosenthal, R Rosenthal, R. (1985). From unconscious experimenter bias to teacher expectancy effects. In J. Dusek, V. Hall, & W, Meyer (Eds.), Teacher expectancies. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, INC. Rosenthal, R., (1973). The Pygmalion effect lives. Psychology Today, 7(4), 56, 58-60, 62-63. Rosenthal, R., & Jacobson, L Rosenthal, R. and Rubin, D.B.., (1971). Pygmalion reaffirmed. In: Elashoff, J.D., and Snow, R.E. Editors, 1971. Pygmalion reconsidered: As case study in statistical inference: Reconsideration of the Rosenthal-Jacobson data on teacher expectancy Charles A Snow, R.E., (1969). Unfinished Pygmalion. Contemporary Psychology v. 14, p. 197-99. Snow, R.E., (1995) Thorndike, R.L., 1968. Review of the book Pygmalion in the classroom. American Educational Research Journal. Vol. 5. Pp. 708-711.