Earlier this week, I heard the statistic that only 58 Little League Baseball World Series players have gone on to play Major League Baseball. Players on teams playing in or trying to play their way into the LLWS are between 10-12 years of age. Based on my experience of little league baseball, I"m certain many of these young players were labeled and identified as "the best," a "future star," or "a pro." Especially in youth sports, we tend to identify and label and sort kids at an early age. The evidence would indicate we tend to be wrong on that early labeling and identifying more often that not. That LLWS fact made me revisit a short piece I wrote considering labels we place on students and young people, in this case, student athletes. I've pasted the writing below.
Recently, my 9th grade son’s high school sent parents an email with the subject line, “Benefits of a Student Athlete.” The message only had two sections, with no greeting or introduction. The first section, re-printed below as Figure 1,is titled, “National Statistics Show High School Students Have” (see Figure 1), and consists of seven bullet points detailing what high school student athletes “have,” as opposed, one assumes, to other types of students. The second section of the email includes a list of coaches, their sports, and their email addresses. In what follows, I reflect on the information included in Figure 1, the apparent attributes of high school athletes, in light of research looking at how identity shapes motivation, as well as how stereotypes impact identity.
Figure 1: High School Athlete Characteristics
(Email, "Local" High School, 1/26/2023)
As Master, et. al. (2016) succinctly state, “Students’ identities influence their motivation in school” (300). Further, students, just like non-students, maintain a variety of identities, from good at math to honors student to marching band member. Unfortunately, many of these identities come with stereotypes, and, as Master, et. al., (2016) note, “Stereotypes create uncertainty, as members of stereotyped groups question how other people are viewing them” (308). An identification with a particular stereotype, in turn, leads to stereotype threat, “the concern about being seen through the lens of a negative stereotype about one’s group” (Master, et. al. 2016, 308). Research shows that stereotype threat contributes negatively to performance and motivation, especially in school-aged youth.
Educational institutions, particularly middle and high schools, are rife with stereotypes and identity formation. As children mature into young adults, with the onset of puberty, and a need for both independence and acceptance by social groups, they become particularly attuned to stereotypes and, in turn, impacted by stereotype threats. For example, the group commonly referred to as “student athletes” today may have been labeled “jocks” in past generations. The jock stereotype, in many cases, operated in direct opposition to “nerds” or those students identifying with academics. Such stereotypes provide shorthand for the various and numerous qualities or characteristics of jocks or nerds, and such shorthand also provides a strong identity for those students categorized into such labels or groups, leaving little grey area for a continuum of identity. So, a student who plays football is a jock, with all of the identity-baggage that surrounds the “jock” group label, and the student with a perfect GPA, taking AP courses, identifies as, or is identified as, a “nerd,” and all such attributes connected to that label. And this identification process can operate as a two-way street, further solidifying such identities, with an individual identifying as a “jock” for example and then, in turn, others identifying that student as a “jock.” In this sense, identification functions from an “I’ perspective, a “we” perspective, and a “they” perspective, culminating in a fairly strong identification with a social group.
Evidence for the impact stereotypes and identity can have on motivation is illustrated in the aforementioned email regarding “Benefits of a Student Athlete.” On the surface, the email appears to be a recruitment email, encouraging students to join high school sports, and, further, contact coaches through the provided email addresses. However, this message, and the accompanying bulleted attributes of student athletes, also, more importantly, seem to be combating stereotypes of “jocks,” now labeled “student athletes.” These attributes of student athletes range from academic attributes, such as higher GPA, to social attributes, such as leadership skills. Students and, in turn, parents, may identify with, or wish to identify with, these attributes, which in turn, asks them to identify with the label of “student athlete.” Connecting such positive attributes with the identity of student athletes combats the popular stereotypes of student athletes, which may not include higher GPAs and higher graduation rates. Such a connection illustrates Master, et. al.’s (2016) claim, “When students want to demonstrate that they possess a particular identity…, they are motivated to perform behaviors associated with that identity. Cues in the environment can often make this link between behavior and identity more salient, thus influencing behavior” (303). This email, and the student athlete attributes bulleted list, may function as a “cue” in students’ environments, leading to motivation and behavior change around such characteristics. In other words, an individual student can identify as an athlete AND as a successful student. This, in turn, can motivate positive behavior in the classroom and on the field.
It is also worth noting that such an email, listing positive characteristics of student athletes, may also engage and complicate common stereotypes and identity conceptions from students (and parents) who do not identify with the athlete label or group. Noted by Master, et. al. (2016), “Social groups may also carry with them stereotypes about the characteristics of the people in that group” (304). Connecting such positive attributes with student athletes in a public facing document may also impact the ways in which non-student athletes characterize student athletes. Students’ and others’ assumptions about student athletes may be contradicted by the statistics detailing athletes’ higher GPAs and better performance in core subjects. The stereotype of a “dumb jock” does not hold up in the evidence presented, causing a reconsideration of stereotypes connected to particular social groups. Ultimately, if the non-student athlete population adjusts their negative stereotypes of student athletes, these student athletes may in turn feel less pressured by such negative stereotypes, leading to further identification with the positive characteristics of student athletes.
Identity and belonging are key to the high school experience. Moving conceptions of identity, such as the stereotyped “jock” versus the more nuanced identity of “student athlete,” into a continuum rather than an either/or framework holds promise for improving students’ motivation and performance. Granted, “student athlete” is not the sole identity available to high schoolers and one speculates as to potential future “Benefits of [insert identity group]” emails addressing other, commonly stereotyped, social groups. Maybe, in the near future, my inbox will be filled with emails titled “Benefits of being in marching band,” or “Benefits of ROTC” or “Benefits of Speech and Debate Team members.” Until then, parents, in particular, especially in conversation with their school-aged children, may reconsider how the promotion, both implicit and explicit, of particular stereotypes and identities may impact our children’s motivation and performance as they traverse the developmental years of middle and high school.
Comments