Walton and Fisk (a psychologist and sociologist, respectively) found that women perform far better in traditionally male disciplines (math and engineering) when they are made to feel like they belong, that they "fit in" with those disciplines. Essentially when women are around sexist men who make them feel like they should try fitting into more typically female disciplines (writing, for example), women tend to do worse in their math and engineering performances. In addition, when women hear uplifting stories about how well women do in math and engineering, they will feel like they belong and perform better. Part of this might be because they will work harder to learn math and engineering, and part of this might be the simple confidence boost that gets them to productively use the knowledge they already have in their brains. Either way, feeling like you belong really matters to how well you will perform at something, especially if you've been told before that you do not belong (in either subtle or overt ways).
Let me digress a bit, if I you'll indulge me. Emile Durkheim warns that in modern society we experience bonds with people that are based on a complex division of labor and not as much like a tight knit community. So we are connected more today with people we don't know (they make what we consume, they make policies that affect us, etc.). The upside of this type of bond (which he calls "organic solidarity") is that new ideas are generated and diffused much more productively. The downside is that it encourages a state of "anomie" where we do not have strong ideas of right and wrong, good and bad (and see the world as gray and not black and white). Consequently we tend to be more anxious, don't trust one another enough, and- here I'm bringing in the relevance to this blog post- we tend to have unrealistic expectations for ourselves. Then, Durkheim argues, we will be more likely to become depressed (and even commit suicide) when our expectations do not meet reality. So, according to Durkheim, one of the reasons we need to give boundaries for our children is so they won't be disappointed, especially in the face of organic solidarity within our modern society. However, I tend to think this is less of a problem than the problem that comes with making people feel like they cannot accomplish something. My impression is that when we feel like we are not outcasts to any one group then we will more confidently talk and work with one another. This is essential to building a strong civil society. Consequently, we need to encourage belonging, especially in the face of old, tired stereotypes of who can belong to what.
So to me this brings up an important point for education as a part of civil society. There is a fear that kids these days feel entitled and, therefore, we should put them in their place so they realize what the real world is like and, consequently, help them avoid anomie. While we should certainly not let kids get by with mediocrity and tell them it's outstanding, I think what this Stanford study tells us is that it's really important to keep telling kids they can do whatever they set their mind to. However, even more importantly, we need to make sure that we direct them to the necessary steps for getting there. We need to build upon and strengthen the already established mechanisms, particularly through public education, to make sure that encouragement also offers direction. Ironically, this is telling us we need to invest in public education (government) to make our non-governmental processes (i.e. talking with others, working with one another, helping one another, etc.) in civil society more productive. The punch line is this: Education is a modality of civil society, especially insofar as it can make people feel like they belong (at least in some way) where they choose to go.
No comments:
Post a Comment