Written evidence submitted by Dr Tammy Campbell, Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, LSE

(DIV0014)

Introduction and reason for submitting evidence

I am an senior research fellow in the Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion at the London School of Economics. My main research interests span childhood and early education: I investigate social, structural, and psychological processes causing inequalities and shaping lives, and the intended and unintended ways in which government policies play out. Below, I draw key points and implications from my work using the national Millennium Cohort Study[1] directly relevant to the enquiry’s questions on the underrepresentation of girls and women – and other groups – in STEM subjects and careers.

Summary

• Children’s experiences in primary school are instrumental in shaping their subsequent experiences in education and work.
• ‘Ability’-grouping for maths in primary school tends disproportionately to allocate girls, children of some Black ethnicities, children with disabilities, and children with less advantaged socio-economic backgrounds to lower groups.
• Low group placement is associated with lowered perceptions of and expectations for children, negative self-fulfilling prophesies, and children’s low self-concept of their own maths skills.
• There is bias and stereotyping among primary school teachers: girls, Black Caribbean children, children with disabilities, and children from less advantaged socio-economic backgrounds are more likely to be underrated at maths by their teacher.
• Both early ‘ability’-grouping and stereotypes and perceptions (and the factors that feed in to stereotypes) should therefore be addressed in order to increase diversity and equality in STEM.

The reasons why certain groups (women, people of some ethnicities, people with disabilities, and people from disadvantaged socioeconomic backgrounds) are underrepresented in STEM

The foundations for individuals’ trajectories through education and beyond are set at an early stage, and research (e.g. Campbell, 2013; 2015; 2017; 2021a; 2021b) shows inequitable experiences of different groups within the school system that are likely to contribute to subsequent patterns of underrepresentation in education, training and employment related to STEM.

Campbell (2015) finds that primary school children who are equivalently skilled at maths (as measured by a cognitive test administered in their homes as part of the Millennium Cohort Study) have unequal chances of being positively rated for ‘ability and attainment’ in maths by their teachers, according to their personal characteristics.

Girls are less likely to be rated positively by their teachers for maths ‘ability and attainment’ – even when they score the same as boys on the maths cognitive test. Black Caribbean children are also more likely to be underrated. Children with reported special educational needs / disabilities (SEND) are less likely to be judged favourably – again, even compared to peers without reported SEND who demonstrate equivalent maths skills. Lastly, children from low-income families are also more likely than equivalent higher-income peers to be underrated. This also holds when other measures of family background (mother’s education level and mother’s National Statistics Socio-Economic Classification [NS-SEC]) are used (Campbell, 2013).

This is important because much primary school ‘attainment’ is teacher-assessed: so patterns of bias and stereotyping in assessment will impact scores attributed to children. It is also important because of self-fulfilling prophesies, and the many ways that perceptions of children can impact their opportunities and experiences within education. Tendencies to under-rating of girls, Back Caribbean children, children with SEND, and children from disadvantaged socioeconomic backgrounds, in maths, can therefore steer trajectories away from maths-related subjects and careers.   

Campbell (2017) also examines teacher perceptions of primary children’s maths ‘ability and attainment,’ exploring the part played by early streaming (whole-year-group ‘ability’-grouping) in school in forming these judgements. There are children with equivalent – higher and lower – maths skills placed across different streams: top, middle, bottom. Children placed in the bottom stream within their school are less likely to be judged favourably by their teacher, and those in the top stream are more likely to be considered of high ‘ability’ / to have high ‘attainment’ in maths.

This suggests that the structure of streaming creates realities where children’s educational trajectories are differentiated – even when their fundamental maths capabilities do not differ at the outset. This is particularly important and relevant to the enquiry because Black children are over-represented in bottom streams, along with children with disabilities, and those with less advantaged family circumstances (parents’ work status; housing tenure / circumstances; poverty; mothers’ qualification level) (Hallam and Parsons, 2013).  

Campbell (2021a; 2021b) examines in-class ‘ability’ grouping for maths and teachers’ judgements of children’s maths ‘ability and attainment’ in early primary school, at age seven. Here the focus is on the apparent effects of group placement and teacher perceptions on children’s later maths self-concept, with a particular examination of differences between girls and boys.

Self-concept is important because it can influence learning behaviours, choices of educational tracks and subject specialisms, attainment and adult careers.

Children from families with higher incomes and those whose mother is educated to degree-level are more likely to be in the higher maths in-class ‘ability’ group, along with those with no reported SEND. Girls are more likely to be in the middle maths ‘ability’ group and less likely to be in the higher group than boys. In line with Campbell (2017), boys are more likely to be judged ‘above average’ at maths by their teacher, alongside those with no reported SEND, children from higher-income families, and those with more highly educated mothers.

Campbell (2021a; 2021b) finds that, at age 11, girls are nearly twice as likely to report they are not ‘good at maths’ than boys. Both ‘ability’-group at seven and teacher judgement at seven are strongly related to maths self-concept at the end of primary school.

Early bottom maths ‘ability’ group placement seems to disadvantage the maths self-concept of all children, even if they have the same maths scores at seven as high-grouped peers. Meanwhile, top group placement is more advantageous for the self-concept of boys than for girls: it can be negatively related to self-concept for some girls.

Teachers’ reported perceptions of children during early primary school are also strongly associated with children’s maths self-concept four years later – again, even when children have the same maths skills to begin with. Additionally, the association between negative teacher judgement and negative maths self-concept is stronger for girls. Building on Campbell (2015), this indicates the importance of perceptions, expectations, bias and stereotyping within the school system in creating self-fulfilling prophesies, and impacting children’s experiences and pathways. 

What could and should be done by the UK Government, UK Research and Innovation, other funding bodies, industry and academia to address the issues identified

Closely examining and reforming the use of ‘ability’ grouping for maths in early primary school could help boost maths progression, and contribute to closing gaps, addressing inequalities, and improving diversity.

Tacking stereotyping in education and the factors that seem to contribute to the formation of stereotypes could also help increase diversity and tackle inequality in STEM. Factors feeding into stereotypes can include characteristic-based accountability, tracking and regulation systems which monitor and shape pupil, teacher and school performance levels. These components of the system can reify and reinforce differentiated notions of ‘potential’ and ‘ability’ which become embedded and self-fulfilling. Factors influencing stereotypes can also include ill-implemented policy initiatives which require schools and teachers to focus on selected pupil groups, unintentionally perpetuating an assumption of deficit rather than growth or capability.

January 2022

References

Campbell, T. (2013) Stereotyped at seven? Biases in teacher judgements of pupils' ability and attainment. CLS working paper 2013/8. https://cls.ucl.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/CLS-WP-20138.pdf

Campbell, T. (2015) Stereotyped at Seven? Biases in Teacher Judgement of Pupils’ Ability and Attainment. Journal of Social Policy 44:3, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047279415000227

Campbell, T. (2017) The relationship between stream placement and teachers' judgements of pupils: Evidence from the Millennium Cohort Study. London Review of Education, 15:3, https://doi.org/10.18546/LRE.15.3.12  

Campbell, T. (2021a) In-class ‘ability’-grouping, teacher judgements and children’s mathematics self-concept: evidence from primary-aged girls and boys in the UK Millennium Cohort Study. Cambridge Journal of Education, 51:5, https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2021.1877619

Campbell, T. (2021b) Little fish, big streams: How do early in-class maths ‘ability’-groups and early teacher judgements relate to primary school children’s later maths self-concept? CaseBrief 40. https://sticerd.lse.ac.uk/case/_new/publications/abstract/?index=7840

Hallam, S. and Parsons, S. (2013) Prevalence of streaming in UK primary schools: evidence from the Millennium Cohort Study. British Educational Research Journal, 39:3, https://doi.org/10.1080/01411926.2012.659721

5