Talk:Stereotype threat
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Gender Studies. This WikiProject aims to improve the quality of articles dealing with gender studies and to remove systematic gender bias from Wikipedia. If you would like to participate in the project, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating. |
"Some critics have charged that the studies cannnot fully explain the black-white achievement gap, which emerges before children are aware of cultural stereotypes."
The emphasized part of that sentence needs a citation. I have removed that half of the sentence because (a) I could figure out how to include a fact template in a way that would make it clear which part of the sentence I thought needed a citation and (b) because I think it's controversial enough a claim on its own that it shouldn't be left in without citation. —mako (talk•contribs) 22:43, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- I think you made the right move here. futurebird 01:06, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] removed graph/afro template
Yer average wikipedia reader won't understand the graph. The key point is that the black and white students scored equally well before the experimental "threat". If anything, the graph implies that there is no stereotype threat effect on SAT scores outside of the laboratory, but the presentatio makes it look like stereotype threat explains existing differences, which it doesn't.
This page doesnt have anything to do with Africa so i removed the template.
216.254.20.162 02:56, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] interpretations section
I applaud the recent work an an anonymous editor, but I'm trying to NPOV the recent additions somewhat. The recent additions sometimes take it for granted that Steele and Aronson are trying to show that S.T. accounts for overall black-white test gaps. At least some people on the other side of the argument don't think that Steele and Aronson are trying to show this at all, so that aspect of the debate needs to be characterized without taking sides. --Allen 04:35, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
-
- Agree. The link to the post article supports the idea that the critics (if they can be called critics) are concerned that people misundersting the implication of ST will think that ST is the entire cause ofr the gap. No one has disputed that it contributes to the gap and no one has suggested that that was the point of the ST studies to show that this was the entire source of the gap. futurebird 16:59, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
