Educating new generations is not just a matter of vocation; it also demands a deep understanding of how the human mind works. We often think that our decisions as educators are completely rational and objective, but the truth is that it is difficult to escape the cognitive biases that influence our perceptions and judgments.
In the field of education, these biases can affect everything from how we interpret students’ behavior to the expectations we project onto their performance. While a solid academic background, such as an online bachelor’s degree for early childhood education, provides valuable pedagogical tools, it does not immunize us against these biases. It is essential to be aware of the prejudices that can unwittingly creep into the classroom.
The cognitive biases every teacher should banish from their classes
Knowing the cognitive biases that impact teaching not only helps make fairer and more balanced decisions, but also allows for the creation of a more inclusive and enriching learning environment. Banishing these prejudices from the classroom can make a huge difference in the quality of teaching and in the relationships we establish with each student.
1. Pygmalion Effect
In 1968, psychologist Robert Rosenthal and Lenore Jacobson, a school principal in San Francisco, published a book that caused a stir in the educational world: Pygmalion in the Classroom. In the book, they recounted their year-long experiment at a school, where they deceived teachers with fake IQ tests to make them believe that some of their students were gifted and others had learning disabilities.
At the end of the school year, students who were labeled “bright” actually earned better grades. In contrast, those who supposedly had learning difficulties earned lower grades.
How was this possible?
Rosenthal and Jacobson discovered that when teachers formed certain expectations about a student, they developed a series of attitudes and behaviors that made that “prophecy” come true, even if they weren’t fully aware of it.
In the classroom, they tended to pay more attention to students classified as gifted, were more patient, and gave them more opportunities to correct their mistakes than those supposedly struggling with learning. They spent less time with these less-talented students and gave them fewer opportunities to correct their answers, probably because they felt it wasn’t worth the effort.
Subsequent studies have confirmed that the Pygmalion Effect continues to exist in the classroom, so it is essential for teachers to be aware that they are not immune to being influenced by the information they receive from their students, which can ultimately determine their attitudes in the teaching process. As a result of this differential treatment, teachers can influence academic outcomes, for better or worse.
2. Curse of Knowledge
In 1989, economists Colin Camerer, George Loewenstein, and Martin Weber coined the term “curse of knowledge” to refer to a cognitive bias according to which, once we have acquired certain knowledge, we find it difficult to put ourselves in the shoes of someone who does not possess it. Later, other research extrapolated this bias to different contexts, including the classroom. They found that we struggle to return to our pre-knowledge selves and that we are often unaware of its influence when interacting with others.
In the classroom, this cognitive bias can become a silent trap for educators. It’s true that teachers are trained to transmit their knowledge as effectively as possible, but the act of teaching inevitably increases the risk of falling prey to the curse of knowledge.
The more integrated the knowledge of a discipline is, the more abstractly we tend to speak about it, unless we make a conscious effort to make it more understandable. Those who have perfect mastery of a subject often struggle to explain basic concepts or adapt content to different levels of understanding.
In fact, a study conducted at the University of Cambridgefound that the curse of knowledge “can lead to various problems, such as difficulties communicating with students and making them feel less comfortable in the classroom.”
Furthermore, this cognitive bias can also influence the assessment of learning. When designing tests or assignments, educators may overestimate their students’ ability to connect complex concepts or solve problems that, from their perspective, seem simple. This can translate into unrealistic expectations and a misperception of the actual difficulties students face.
In the long run, the curse of knowledge generates frustration in both teachers and students, as the former assumes that certain prior knowledge is obvious when, in reality, it isn’t, and the latter fails to grasp the basic concepts that allow them to advance in their learning. Therefore, it is essential to always assess students’ prior knowledge and assume it doesn’t exist unless there is solid evidence to the contrary.
3. In-group Bias
In 1954, Muzafer and Carolyn Sherif conducted one of the most famous investigations in social psychology to try to understand the origin of prejudice in groups. In The Robber’s Cave Experiment, they created animosity between two groups of adolescents and found that when there were conflicts or incompatible goals, they suffered a cognitive distortion that led them to sympathize with their group and reject the other.
Subsequent research has shown that ingroup bias occurs in minimal intergroup situations and even in the absence of conflict. This phenomenon, also called ingroup favoritism, refers to the tendency to favor, benefit, or value more positively the group to which we believe we belong because we share values, behaviors, attitudes, preferences, or perceptions with those people.
In fact, neuroscience has shownthat when we identify with a group, many of the brain areas linked to our self-image are activated. This self-referential processing leads us to view the ingroup and the people who belong to it as closer to us.
In the classroom, this cognitive bias can be unconsciously expressed as favoritism toward students whom teachers perceive as more similar to themselves. For example, a teacher who was a highly participatory student may value more positively those who frequently participate in class, while those who maintain a low profile will go unnoticed or be perceived as less committed or competent.
Likewise, in-group favoritism can influence how teachers assign responsibilities or collaborative tasks, the type of feedback they provide, or even the academic expectations they project onto students. This predisposition can reinforce inequality dynamics in the classroom, as students perceived as “more like-minded” often receive greater support and positive evaluations, while others fall behind and miss out on opportunities for development.
How to keep biases out of the classroom?
Although they are part of human nature, teachers must strive to minimize cognitive biases in education with conscious strategies and pedagogical practices based on ongoing reflection.
The first step is to recognize that we are all vulnerable to falling into these mental patterns and that their influence does not simply fade with experience or academic training. Therefore, it is essential to cultivate a reflective attitude that allows us to detect when our decisions are influenced by unconscious biases.
Take time to reflect on your decisions and ask yourself if they are based on objective perceptions or unconscious biases. Tools such as reflective journals or feedback from other teachers can help you become aware of these biases.
Establish clear evaluation criteria to reduce subjectivity, and work on recognizing and managing your emotions to prevent them from fueling these biases. Constantly ask yourself: “Am I basing my teaching on facts or assumptions?”
It’s also important to implement group dynamics that rotate roles to avoid implicit preferences and to include activities that encourage collaborative work between students of different profiles to break down the invisible barriers created by biases.
Ultimately, transforming the classroom into a bias-free space is not only an act of pedagogical responsibility, but also an opportunity to build more authentic and enriching relationships with students.
References:
Shatz, I. (2023) The curse of knowledge when teaching statistics. Teaching Statistics; 45(1): 22-26.
Molenberghs, P. (2013) The neuroscience of in-group bias. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews; 37(8): 1530-1536.
Camerer, C.; Loewenstein, G. & Weber, M. (1989) The Curse of Knowledge in Economic Settings: An Experimental Analysis. JournalofPoliticalEconomy; 97(5): 1232-1254.
Rosenthal, R. & Jacobson, L. (1980) Pigmalión en la escuela. Expectativas del maestro y desarrollo intelectual del alumno. Madrid: Ed. Marova.
Sherif, M.; Harvey, O. J.; White, B. J.; Hood, W. E. & Sherif, C. S. (1961) Intergroup conflict and cooperation: The Robbers Cave experiment. Norman: University of Oklahoma Book Exchange.
Leave a Reply