Combatting Unconscious Bias in Education

Last registered on December 03, 2021

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Combatting Unconscious Bias in Education
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0008620
Initial registration date
November 30, 2021

Initial registration date is when the trial was registered.

It corresponds to when the registration was submitted to the Registry to be reviewed for publication.

First published
December 03, 2021, 2:49 PM EST

First published corresponds to when the trial was first made public on the Registry after being reviewed.

Locations

Region

Primary Investigator

Affiliation
University of Bologna

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Affiliation
University of Reading
PI Affiliation
University of Reading

Additional Trial Information

Status
In development
Start date
2021-11-01
End date
2023-07-31
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
The intervention consists of Unconscious Bias Training (UBT) designed specifically for primary school teachers. The training builds on rich evidence from an ever-growing interdisciplinary literature and has been fine-tuned to the primary school setting via two pilot studies in both the UK and Italy. Our theory of change is that making teachers aware of the existence and pervasiveness of unconscious bias and suggesting concrete actions to counter it (targeting classroom environments, modes of communication and feedback, and teaching Unconscious Bias (UB) to children) can improve teacher practices, learning environments, and, in the long run, pupils’ outcomes.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Biroli, Pietro, Marina Della Giusta and Florent Dubois. 2021. "Combatting Unconscious Bias in Education." AEA RCT Registry. December 03. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.8620-1.0
Sponsors & Partners

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
The intervention consists of Unconscious Bias Training (UBT) designed specifically for primary school teachers. The training builds on rich evidence from an ever-growing interdisciplinary literature and has been fine-tuned to the primary school setting via two pilot studies in both the UK and Italy. Our theory of change is that making teachers aware of the existence and pervasiveness of unconscious bias and suggesting concrete actions to counter it (targeting classroom environments, modes of communication and feedback, and teaching Unconscious Bias (UB) to children) can improve teacher practices, learning environments, and, in the long run, pupils’ outcomes.
Intervention (Hidden)
*Pilots*
The first pilot study was carried out by Marina Della Giusta with a team of educationalists and psychologists with a sample of primary UK teachers in 2016/17. The initial training sessions were developed with the idea of stimulating the knowledge of unconscious bias and prejudices and how they operate. Evidence from this pilot suggested that the initial intervention improved the classroom environment, teaching materials, and teachers’ awareness of the impact of UB. In 2017/18, Marina Della Giusta in collaboration with Pearson developed the training into a programme of three labs. These labs, not only stimulated awareness of unconscious bias and prejudices, but also aimed at providing concrete methods to avoid them both in communication and in evaluation. This new pilot took place in Italy and was carried out by specialist trainers. The training labs lasted 2-3 hours and happened at several weeks intervals from each other to allow time for reflection and for embedding the proposed activates in elements of the teaching syllabus. We presented the training as an opportunity to increase teaching effectiveness and enjoyment, and explained that it would help address biases that naturally occur in the environment, in the practice, and in the behaviours of all those involved in education (from the producers of materials all the way to pupils themselves).

*Background*
Discrimination stereotyping and unconscious bias affect educational outcomes through many channels (Banks et al. 2008; Campbell, 2015; Blank et al, 2016; Gilliam et al. 2016; Alesina et al 2018). Teachers' actions and beliefs can influence children’s cognitive (attainment) and socio-emotional (behaviour, character, engagement) development as well as their expectations. Research has shown that teachers’ diminished expectations of children with names associated with low socioeconomic status affect student’s cognitive performance (Figlio, 2005), that essays designated with either German or Turkish names were differently graded in schools in Germany (Sprietsma, 2009), and that the assessment of African American children’s behaviour was rated as more disruptive and inattentive by teachers from a different ethnic group (Dee, 2005). Conversely, optimistic teachers’ expectations have been found to particularly benefit the achievement of students from minorities in the US (Jussim and Harber, 2005), more gender-egalitarian teachers have been found to increase the performance and uptake of STEM by girls (Alan et al., 2018; Carlana, 2019), and generally to be able to increase the performance of pupils through positive expectations of them (Figlio, 2005; Sprietsma, 2009; Campbell, 2015; Hannah and Linden, 2012).
Teachers’ influence is both direct—through teaching, feedback, and monitoring—and indirect—through their mediating role in learning environments (Gorard, 2016; EEF, 2013; Morris and Perry, 2017). Bias has been documented in teaching materials (Blumberg, 2015) and school environments in which teachers can intervene, as well as of course in the pupils themselves. It is important to tackle stereotypes early as they emerge in early childhood (Bian et al, 2017) and exposure to bias toward one’s group affects effort, self-confidence, productivity, pupils’ performance, and field choices (Carlana, 2019; Carlana and Corno, 2021; Atewologun et al, 2018; Perry, 2017; Gilliam et al, 2016; Campbell, 2015; Devine et al, 2013; Schmader, 2010; Johns et al. 2005). Unconscious bias training (UBT) shows potential to be a very useful and relatively inexpensive tool to reduce involuntary sources of discrimination: there is evidence that UBT works for doctors (Teal et al, 2012) and that debiasing can have significant impacts (Bohnet, 2015). Yet, UBT is little used in education, despite evidence that it can affect pupil’s outcomes (Atewologun et al, 2018; Perry, 2017; Gilliam et al, 2016; Campbell, 2015; Devine et al, 2013).

*Hypotheses*
Does training teachers to detect and deal with unconscious bias lead to a better learning environment for both teachers and pupils?
Intervention Start Date
2021-11-30
Intervention End Date
2022-06-30

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
teacher’s ability to recognize bias, changes in teaching practices, and disadvantaged pupils’ performance
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
Teachers' ability to recognize bias is measured by using a database of 100 images coming from Pearson textbooks. These images have been previously selected and rated by Pearson experts. The measurement consists of the teachers evaluating how stereotypical an image is on a 1-5 Likert scale. They are presented with a series of 20 images and they will do this exercise twice, one at the registration step and the other after the evaluation is done.

Changes in teaching practices are measured with a survey that will be repeated post-evaluation. We ask about the frequency of group work, role games and simulation, debates and Socratic seminars, presentation of students' research, vote to decide between activities, use of ICT (information and communication technology), and students' auto-evaluation.

Pupils' performance is assessed via a simple test done twice (before and after the intervention). The test is divided into four thematic categories: Math, Language, Verbal reasoning, and Non-verbal reasoning. Each theme is divided into two questions with a box for the final result and another one for details and explanations about how they reach the final result. We then identify disadvantaged pupils via a survey conducted at the same time asking for characteristics such as gender, disability, or migrant status. The test is then double-marked by teachers, first openly, then blindly (with the pupil's information hidden).

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
teachers’ enjoyment as well as pupils’ learning environment, well-being, and aspirations
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)
Teachers' enjoyment is measured with a survey conducted twice (before and after the intervention). We ask about their satisfaction with several aspects of teaching on a 1-7 Likert scale: teaching in general, life in general, their work, their school, their colleagues, their relationship with students, their relationship with the students' families.

The pupils' learning environments are measured through a survey conducted twice (before and after the intervention). The pupils are asked about their overall well-being in the classroom, how much they like school, how easily they can get help for schoolwork, the extent of anti-social behaviours in their classroom and their school, and reactions from their teacher and school. All questions are based on Likert scales.

We measure the pupils' aspirations and expectations in a survey conducted twice (before and after the intervention). We first ask pupils about their dream job via an open question, then how confident their parents and teacher are in them achieving this goal on a 1-5 Likert scale.

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
The study consists of a two-arm randomized controlled trial. The treatment arm is an unconscious bias training tailored for primary school teachers. The training consists of three sessions. The control arm is a training programme on digital skills and inclusive teaching, and will have exactly the same amount of hours of intervention and at the same time as the treated teachers.
The research population will include grade 3-4-5 teachers and pupils in Italian primary schools. The schools are recruited by Pearson.
Experimental Design Details
*Intervention Details*
The study consists of a two-arm randomized controlled trial. The treatment arm is an unconscious bias training tailored for primary school teachers. The training consists of three sessions:
• Generative lab to develop understanding and awareness of the psychology and real-life consequences of unconscious bias, tools to recognise in the teaching practice, and actions to prevent it. The lab includes the presentation of relevant theory and applications through group activities and reflection. Activities to be conducted in class are assigned and explained
• Replicative lab to learn how to teach UB to children (contributing to the social and emotional dimension of learning) and how to develop and use growth mindset tools and fostering inclusiveness. Activities to be conducted in class are assigned and explained
• Evaluative lab to help teachers assess their progress and sustain and embed practice through programming curricula and activities, choosing and organising resources, and thinking about evaluation methods. Activities to be embedded in ongoing practice are provided as well as a support network of other CUBE teachers.

In-between each lab, teachers will have some time to implement the proposed activities.

The control arm is a training programme on digital skills and inclusive teaching, which will act as a placebo, and will follow the same structure as the first arm. The content of the training activities will be different but teachers enrolled in this programme will have exactly the same amount of hours of intervention and at the same time as the first arm teachers.

*Recruitment and Compliance*
Pearson Italia approached schools with letters introducing the programme and the University of Reading, presenting the possibility to enrol in two possible teacher training programs that aim to address Diversity, explaining their content (three sessions with trainers spread over the school year with activities to carry out in class in between) and explaining that they can register their interest via a google form. In the letter, we reassured school heads by clarifying data protection and ethical issues (GDPR and university ethical protocol).

Pupils in the enrolled teachers’ classes will be presented with a consent form and an information sheet about the programme for their parents to sign.

Pearson Italia was also in charge of recruiting the trainers that will track the teachers’ progress and assist them in any activity.

*Data Collection and Sources of Data*
All data on teachers will be collected via a website specifically designed for this purpose (www.cubeprogramme.com). Data on pupils will be collected on paper via an age-appropriate test and a quick questionnaire that will be filled in during class time.

*Expected timeline:*
i. Dec 2021: Baseline survey
ii. Dec 2021-May 2022: Intervention. First lab in December; second lab in March; third lab in May
iii. May 2022: Pupil’s in-class test and survey
iv. June 2022: Teacher’ survey
Randomization Method
individual-level randomization of teacher done by the computer once the teacher signs up on the website
Randomization Unit
Teacher
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
300 teachers. 100 in the first year of the study and 200 in the following year
Sample size: planned number of observations
300 teachers and roughly 1000 students
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
150 teachers per arm
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
the minimum detectable effect size with 100 teachers individually and equally randomized between treatment and control arm is 0.28 of a standard deviation. Once we will reach 300 teachers we will have an MDE of 0.16
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
University of Reading School of Politics, Economics and International Relations Research Ethics Committee
IRB Approval Date
2021-09-27
IRB Approval Number
N/A

Post-Trial

Post Trial Information

Study Withdrawal

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information

Intervention

Is the intervention completed?
No
Data Collection Complete
Data Publication

Data Publication

Is public data available?
No

Program Files

Program Files
Reports, Papers & Other Materials

Relevant Paper(s)

Reports & Other Materials