Abstract
This study tested three assumptions which appear to underlie the decision making process that permits the systematic labeling of the so called six hour retarded child. Subjects were 36 randomly selected teacher clusters (8 teachers per cluster) in the field-test network of the Curriculum Research and Development Center in Mental Retardation (Yeshiva University). Each cluster was randomly assigned one of nine hypothetical but realistic profiles of students. Teachers were then asked to evaluate the adaptiveness of the child and the appropriateness of a mental retardation label. The results support the notion that teachers' labeling decisions tend to be biased against the lower socioeconomic levels and thus contribute to the inappropriate labeling of these children.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
