See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/330609937

Discrimination and academic (dis)engagement of ethnic-racial minority

students: a social identity threat perspective

Article in Social Psychology of Education · April 2019

DOI: 10.1007/s11218-018-09476-0

CITATIONS READS

82 3,121

3 authors:

Maykel Verkuyten Jochem T Thijs

Utrecht University Utrecht University
332 PUBLICATIONS 15,429 CITATIONS 113 PUBLICATIONS 4,978 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Nadya Gharaei
KU Leuven
12 PUBLICATIONS 142 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Jochem T Thijs on 28 January 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Social Psychology of Education
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-018-09476-0

Discrimination and academic (dis)engagement

of ethnic‑racial minority students: a social identity threat
perspective

Maykel Verkuyten1,2 · Jochem Thijs1 · Nadya Gharaei3

Received: 11 May 2018 / Accepted: 14 December 2018

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Abstract
In this paper we discuss the social identity processes by which discrimination can
have an impact on ethnic-racial minority group students’ academic engagement.
After considering the forms, targets and sources of discrimination, we argue that
discrimination implies social identity threat. Threats to ethnic/racial identity com-
promise specific social identity needs (belongingness, esteem, control) which relate
to important motives for academic engagement and performance. Minority students
seek to cope with their threatened ethnic/racial identity, and increased engagement
as well as protective disengagement with the academic domain, at both the indi-
vidual level and the group level, are discussed as coping strategies. We also briefly
consider the possible moderating roles of individual differences in the subjective
importance of one’s ethnic or racial group membership, and of three classroom char-
acteristics: classroom composition, student–teacher relation, and multicultural edu-
cation. We conclude by providing directions for future research and consider some
practical implications.

Keywords Discrimination · Academic engagement · Minority students

* Maykel Verkuyten
[email protected]
1
Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences, Utrecht University, Padualaan 14,
3584 CH Utrecht, Netherlands
2
Department of Social Sciences, Utrecht University, P.O. Box 80.140, 3508 TC Utrecht,
Netherlands
3
Leuven University, Louvain, Belgium

13
Vol.:(0123456789)
 M. Verkuyten et al.

1 Introduction

In many societies, ethnic and racial minority youth (ER minority; Umaña-Tay-
lor et al. 2014) are regularly confronted with negative stereotypes, rejection, and
discrimination (e.g., Benner and Graham 2013; Umaña-Taylor 2016; Verkuyten
and Thijs 2002). These devaluation experiences have negative repercussions for
psychological well-being (see Pascoe and Smart Richman 2009; Schmitt et al.
2014) and for academic engagement and performance (e.g., Huynh and Fuligni
2010; Powell and Arriola 2003; Smalls et al. 2007; Teny et al. 2013; Verkuyten
and Thijs 2004; Wong et al. 2003). They also contribute to unequal educational
outcomes for children and adolescents among a wide range of ethnic and racial
groups, in different societies, and longitudinally. However, work on academic
engagement has examined discrimination as an academic risk factor without
specifying its exact nature and the psychological mechanisms involved in its
effects on academic (dis)engagement. Thus, although the association between dis-
crimination and academic engagement has been examined, much less is known
about when and how discrimination impacts academic outcomes. Furthermore,
the existing research lacks an organizing theoretical framework that allows to
evaluate the research conducted and provides directions for future research.
In the current paper we do not present a summary or systematic review of the
existing research findings (Benner 2017). Rather, our aim is to theoretically artic-
ulate and discuss the social identity mechanisms by which discrimination may
affect the academic engagement of ethnic and racial minority students. Theoreti-
cally the impact of discrimination experiences have been examined in terms of,
for example, resilience (Masten 2001), strain theory (Agnew 2001), and stress-
related aspects that undermine school engagement (Gougis 1986; Liebkind and
Jasinskaja-Lahti 2000). However, a key aspect of ER discrimination is that one’s
minority group identity is at stake which means that social identity processes
are involved. We use a social identity perspective in trying to make a theoretical
contribution to the further development of a comprehensive understanding of the
associations between experiences of discrimination and poor school adjustment.
Specifically, we use Identity Process Theory (Breakwell 1986; Vignoles 2011)
and the notion of social identity threat to discuss research on the relation between
discrimination and academic engagement in ER minority students. Experiences
of ER discrimination take many forms and occur in many contexts but repre-
sent, to varying degrees, threats to being accepted and valued, and having control
over one’s own life (Richman and Leary 2009). Because the large majority of the
research is on older children and adolescents (end of primary school and second-
ary school) we focus predominantly on these age groups and at the end of the
paper we consider possible developmental changes in meanings and responses to
ER discrimination. Furthermore, we do not only consider research conducted in
the context of the USA but also in other countries.
Our discussion draws on theoretical and empirical work and is structured
according to Fig. 1 which makes a distinction between key aspects of ER discrim-
ination and the ways these might compromise social identity needs and thereby

13
Discrimination and academic (dis)engagement of ethnic-racial…

Classroom characteristics

Threatened Social Identy Academic Disengagement

ER discriminaon Needs ----------------------------------------------
------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- cognive
- Behavior Belonging emoonal
- Target Esteem behavioral
- Source Control

Minority group identity

Fig. 1  A conceptual model of the interrelations between ethnic/racial (ER) discrimination, social identity
needs and academic disengagement with two possible moderators

undermine academic engagement. We will first consider the multidimensional-

ity of discrimination by making a distinction between dimensions, targets, and
sources of discrimination. Then we discuss the proposition that ER discrimination
forms an ER identity threat for minority group students. Specifically, discrimina-
tion is considered to compromise three important social identity needs proposed
by Identity Process Theory: belonging, esteem, and control (Breakwell 1986;
Vignoles 2011). We will discuss the importance of these three identity needs for
academic engagement by making connections with important educational theo-
ries about motivational processes for academic engagement (for reviews of these
theories see, e.g., Eccles and Wigfield 2002; Reeve 2012; Wentzel and Wigfield
1998). Furthermore we will consider some important individual and classroom
moderating factors.
In the educational and psychological literature, academic engagement has been
conceptualized in different ways and there is theoretical disagreement about its rela-
tion to motivation. Sometimes a clear distinction is made but at other times the two
concepts are used interchangeably (see for reviews, Finn and Zimmer 2012; Reschly
and Christenson 2012). Motivation refers to the question of what sets people in
motion, and it can be defined as “the energization (i.e., instigation) and direction
of behavior” (Elliot and Covington 2001, p. 73). The concept of academic engage-
ment tends to be used in a broader sense and educational researchers have made
a distinction between behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement (Fredricks
et al. 2004). Whereas cognitive and behavioral engagement includes strategies that
are necessary to perform and achieve well (e.g., flexibility in problem solving, and
paying attention), emotional engagement involves affective states that sometimes are
considered part of motivation (e.g., interest) (Fredricks et al. 2004). Here, we use the
term ‘engagement’ for the cognitive and behavioral outcomes of academic motiva-
tion processes that result from threatened social identity needs (Reeve 2012).

13
 M. Verkuyten et al.

2 Ethnic and racial discrimination

Discrimination is a complex phenomenon that can take various forms and often
is difficult to detect and to study. In many situations it is not easy to establish
whether discrimination actually occurs. That is one reason why research tends to
focus on subjective experiences of discrimination. The other reason is that these
experiences matter psychologically and can correspond with the actual discrimi-
nation that occurs (Kaiser and Pratt-Hyatt 2009). Ethnic and racial discrimination
is generally considered to consist of the behavioral expression of stereotypes and
prejudices. It can be defined as unjust and unequal treatment based on one’s ER
group membership. Not all sources and forms of discrimination can be expected
to have the same impact on students’ academic engagement. For example, a stu-
dent who is discriminated by school personnel probably will not feel the same as
a student who is excluded by her peers (see Brown 2017). And having to deal with
long-term, pervasive discrimination can be expected to have a more detrimental
effect on school safety feelings and academic engagement, compared to a single
incident of discrimination. Thus, although all types of discrimination confer a
devalued ER identity on the discriminated, they differ considerably in their spe-
cific features. Yet, researchers tend to operationalize perceived discrimination by
measuring it in a rather general way (e.g., ‘being unfairly treated because of one’s
ethnicity’) or by lumping together experiences with discrimination across differ-
ent settings (e.g., neighborhoods, schools, shops) or sources (e.g., peers, teachers,
shopkeepers; see Sanchez et al. 2016). The fact that such measures can have suf-
ficient internal consistency indicates that there are reliable individual differences
in the general perception of ER discrimination. However, aggregating across a
variety of forms, contexts and perpetrators makes it impossible to examine, for
example, whether discrimination in school has a different meaning for academic
engagement than discrimination outside of school, and whether discrimination by
teachers has a different impact than peer discrimination.
The complexity of discrimination has led researchers to propose distinctions
between various aspects of discrimination but there is little empirical work on the
relevance and importance of these distinctions. This greatly hampers our under-
standing of the different roles that ER discrimination might play in minority stu-
dents’ academic engagement. ER discrimination can be characterized by three
broad features: characteristics of the behavior, characteristics of the target, and
characteristics of the source (Williams 2001).
The first feature refers to the type of discrimination and its pervasiveness
across time and context. ER discrimination can take different forms (e.g. name-
calling, social exclusion, unfair treatment), can be incidental or chronic, institu-
tional or intentional, direct and indirect, and covert or more overt (Brown 2017).
These different aspects can be expected to matter for the educational engage-
ment of ethnic and racial minority students. For example, institutional school
policies that unintentionally restrict the opportunities and experiences of minor-
ity students differ from explicit discrimination by teachers or peers, and from a
colorblind perspective that tends to ignore minority group-based experiences.

13
Discrimination and academic (dis)engagement of ethnic-racial…

And incidental discrimination experiences differ from systematically experienc-

ing unfair treatment and biased academic expectations that minority students can
internalize (Tenenbaum and Ruck 2007).
Additionally, the research on stereotype threat demonstrates that not only perva-
sive discrimination but also the situational awareness of negative group stereotypes
(i.e. “African Americans are not as intelligent as European Americans”) can under-
mine the academic performance of minority group students. This has been found for
African Americans, Latino and African Caribbean students, among young children
and adolescents (for reviews, see Shapiro and Neuberg 2007; Quinn et al. 2010),
and also among minority youth in Europe (e.g., Baysu et al. 2016). Research has
demonstrated that stereotype threat is truly a situational threat and not due to the
internalization of recurrent negative experiences. The impaired performance occurs
when situational features activate the relevant negative group stereotype which
the related depletion of mental resources (see Quinn et al. 2010). In an ethnically
diverse sample of 6–10 year old children McKown and Weinstein (2003) demon-
strated that minority children were more aware of negative stereotypes about their
group and this awareness was a prerequisite for performance decrements. In another
study it was found that second-generation, but not first-generation, Afro-Caribbean
undergraduates underperformed in a stereotype threat situation (Deaux et al. 2007).
Both generations were aware of negative stereotypes about African-Americans but
only the second generation identified with African-Americans.
Second, the target of discrimination refers to the distinction between discrimi-
nation directed at one’s ER minority group as a whole and oneself as a minority
member (see Schmitt et al. 2014). There is ample evidence for the personal-group
discrimination discrepancy that states that minority members—also children and
adolescents—perceive less discrimination against themselves than against their
group as a whole (Brown et al. 2011; Stevens and Thijs 2018; Taylor et al. 1994;
Verkuyten 1998, 2002). Furthermore, not only personal discrimination but also
group discrimination has been found to have negative implications for psychologi-
cal well-being. For example, whereas higher personal discrimination has been found
to be related to lower self-esteem among ethnic minority youth, higher perceived
group discrimination is associated with higher internalizing (e.g., fear, worries) and
externalizing problems (e.g., anger, aggression) (Armenta and Hunt 2009; Shorey
et al. 2002; Stevens and Thijs 2018). If ER minority students perceive that co-eth-
nic peers are discriminated, they may feel anxious and less securely related to their
school environment, even if they are spared such experiences themselves. Group dis-
crimination implies that the unequal treatment of members of one’s minority group
is relatively widespread with the related risk that oneself may become a victim. Fur-
ther, there often is a sense of linked fate whereby what happens to one’s ER minor-
ity group is considered a good indicator of what can happen to oneself (Simiem
2005). African American adolescents (11–14 years) who are more aware of racial
group bias in school disciplinary decisions have been found to gradually develop
lower trust in school authorities (Yeager et al. 2017).
The sources of discrimination refers to the perpetrator(s) of the discrimination
that is experienced. Discrimination can come from one particular person, a group
of persons and society more generally, and different sources might have differential

13
 M. Verkuyten et al.

consequences for ER minority students. In a survey research among Latino, African

American and Asian American adolescents it was found that discrimination from
school personnel was associated with poorer academic performance, whereas dis-
crimination from peers was associated with higher psychological maladjustment,
and societal discrimination was associated with heightened racial awareness (Ben-
ner and Graham 2013). Perceived teacher discrimination has been found to be more
important for explaining academic attitudes in Mexican immigrant children (age
8–11) than perceptions of discrimination at the community-level (Brown and Chu
2012). And Eccles et al. (2006) reported that racial discrimination by peers lowered
the value African-American adolescents attached to school, while racial discrimina-
tion by teachers additionally undermined the sense of academic competence—both
of which were found to hamper students’ academic achievement. Yet, other stud-
ies have found that peer discrimination is more harmful than teacher discrimination
(Griffin et al. 2017) or that peer and teacher discrimination are equally problematic
for minority adolescents’ sense of school belonging (D’hondt et al. 2016), as well as
for their perceived importance and usefulness of school, and self-competency beliefs
(Wong et al. 2003).
Taken together, detailed research on the specific role of various aspects of dis-
crimination on academic engagement is clearly useful and needed. There also can be
particular combinations of discrimination experiences (e.g., of forms and sources)
with different implications for school adjustment and academic engagement (Byrd
and Carter Andrews 2016). For example, overt discrimination perpetrated by non-
school adults, and overt as well as covert forms of discrimination by peers have
been found to be differently experienced by ER minority (pre)adolescents in the
US (Hughes et al. 2016). However, this study also found that all three forms and
sources of discrimination (in the sixth grade) were associated with lower well-being
and academic outcomes 2 years later. This suggests that discrimination can be lon-
gitudinally connected to poorer outcomes, independently of who perpetrates it and
what form it takes. Furthermore, past experiences of group-based discrimination can
induce so-called rejection sensitivity in which individuals “anxiously expect, readily
perceive and intensely react to status-based rejection” (Mendoza-Denton et al. 2002,
p. 897). Research in Germany, Switzerland and the US has shown that rejection
sensitivity is cross-sectionally (Wolfgramm et al. 2014) and longitudinally (Men-
doza-Denton et al. 2002) associated with poorer academic engagement and lower
school success in ER minority students (respectively, ninth-graders and university
students).

3 Threatened social identity needs

Minority members experience social identity threat when their minority group
membership, or their group in general, is devalued in a particular context, such as at
school (Ellemers et al. 2002). Identity threat is psychologically problematic because
group identities tend to satisfy a range of social identity needs. Identity Process The-
ory proposes that individuals identify with a particular social group to the degree
that this group provides a sense of belonging (closeness to others), control (sense of

13
Discrimination and academic (dis)engagement of ethnic-racial…

efficacy), esteem (positive sense of self), distinctiveness (sense of uniqueness), con-

tinuity (sense of continuity across time and situation), and meaningfulness (sense
of meaning in life) (Vignoles 2011). Based on different educational theories, to be
discussed below, we suggest that the first three social identity needs are the most
important ones for understanding the impact of ER discrimination on academic
engagement.

3.1 Need to belong

Individuals have a basic need for social belonging and relatedness which is fun-
damental for their well-being (Baumeister and Leary 1995). ER identity devalua-
tion clearly undermines the fulfillment of this need, as it implies that one is not, or
not fully, accepted and does not really belong. Different educational theories have
argued for the importance of a sense of belonging for academic engagement. For
example, both the Self-System Model of Motivation (Connell and Wellborn 1991)
and Self-Determination Theory (SDT; Ryan and Deci 2000) propose that, in addi-
tion to needs for competence and autonomy, individuals have a fundamental need for
relatedness that is a catalyst “for engagement or disaffection” (Furrer and Skinner
2003, p. 149). Research has shown that students who experience more relatedness
are more engaged in their school work (Niemiec and Ryan 2009; Skinner and Bel-
mont 1993). For example, a longitudinal study found that early peer exclusion and
victimization predicted disengagement from class activities, which in turn decreased
academic achievement (Buhs et al. 2006). And experimental research among Afri-
can American undergraduates demonstrated that letting students believe that they
might have few friends led to a lowered sense of belonging which was associated
with lower academic achievement (Walton and Cohen 2007). Furthermore, among
Latino adolescents, school belonging has been found to mediate the relationship
between perceived discrimination and school achievement (Faircloth and Hamm
2005; Roche and Kuperminc 2012).
To our knowledge there are no studies that used the self-system model or SDT
to examine the impact of discrimination on academic engagement. Yet, a number
of studies have found that experiences with ER discrimination within the school
context undermines adolescents’ sense of relatedness and school belonging (e.g.,
Brown and Chu 2012; Coutinho and Koinis-Mitchell 2014; Faircloth and Hamm
2005). Therefore, in general, both theories can be taken to predict that discrimina-
tion undermines adaptive motivation and (ultimately) weakens academic engage-
ment. Schools and classrooms are the main contexts for academic engagement and
this leads to the more specific expectation that experiences with discrimination are
most detrimental for the motivation of ER minority students when these experiences
occur within the school context. But consistent with our conceptual model the exact
sources of discrimination probably matter, and based on SDT it can be hypothe-
sized that discrimination by teachers is more problematic for academic engagement
than discrimination by peers. Teachers are clear representatives of the academic
environment and students’ sense of relatedness to them is important for their aca-
demic motivation (Roorda et al. 2011). If ER minority students feel rejected by their

13
 M. Verkuyten et al.

teacher they are less likely to adopt important academic norms and standards and
might become academically disengaged (see Vansteenkiste et al. 2006).

3.2 Need for control

Discrimination means that one’s outcomes are (partly) under the control of (prej-
udiced) others. It implies that others determine what happens to you and thereby
involves a loss of control and efficacy that can develop into a sense of helplessness
and lack of purpose. A sense of personal control is essential, however, for psycho-
logical well-being and effective functioning, and wanting to maintain such a sense
is, for example, one of the reasons why people often tend to minimize or underesti-
mate the discrimination that they face (Crocker and Major 1989).
According to Rotter’s Locus of Control Theory (1966), people have a stronger
motivation to achieve when they perceive that their outcomes are dependent on their
own actions (internal locus) rather than on chance, circumstances, or the actions of
others (external locus). This is especially likely when there is the additional feel-
ing that the internal cause is under one’s control. When students repeatedly fail and
attribute their failure to a lack of ability (or effort) they have lower (higher) expecta-
tions of success, and this undermines (strengthens) their motivation and engagement
(Weiner 2000).
Bandura’s Self-Efficacy Theory (1997) can be seen as an elaboration of these
propositions (see Skinner et al. 1998). The theory makes the distinction between
perceived self-efficacy and outcome expectancies as different but related types of
control beliefs. Perceived self-efficacy involves the “beliefs in one’s capabilities
to organize and execute the courses of action required to produce the given attain-
ments” (Bandura 1997, p. 3), and outcome expectancies refer to generalized beliefs
that particular actions lead to intended outcomes. Self-Efficacy Theory claims that
both types of belief are important for understanding human motivation, and there-
fore for academic engagement. Students may be convinced, for example, that prepar-
ing well for lectures results in higher grades, yet simultaneously believe that they are
unable to sufficiently prepare themselves. Conversely, even highly self-efficacious
students would be unlikely to study hard when they believe that doing so does not
pay off (see also Eccles et al. 1984; Eccles and Wigfield 2002).
Because students cannot simply change their ethnic origin or race they have lim-
ited influence on their experiences with ER discrimination. As a result, these experi-
ences might undermine students’ sense of control. Even if minority students do not
doubt their abilities, they could become quite pessimistic about the likelihood that
effort pays off. Such a lowered sense of control can manifest itself in the classroom.
A study among Mexican–American adolescents showed that perceptions of peer dis-
crimination and teacher discrimination were associated with lower academic self-
efficacy and thereby with lower academic grades (Berkel et al. 2010). Other research
has looked at students’ global feelings of control and found those to be negatively
related to their perceptions of school-based discrimination. Liebkind et al. (2004)
showed that a sense of mastery played a mediating role in the link between per-
ceived discrimination and school adjustment (including behavioral engagement) in

13
Discrimination and academic (dis)engagement of ethnic-racial…

Finnish adolescents of Vietnamese origin. Another study found that discrimination

was associated with a lower sense of general self-efficacy and lower academic per-
sistence (behavioral engagement) in African-American adolescents (Butler-Barnes
et al. 2013).
Discrimination can also have a detrimental impact on minority students’ percep-
tions of future control. Several studies measured the perceived utility of school and
found that perceptions of school-based racial discrimination were negatively asso-
ciated with the importance that (pre)adolescents attributed to education in general
(e.g., Chavous et al. 2008; Cogburn et al. 2011; Perreira et al. 2010; Wong et al.
2003). Other work has examined students’ beliefs about the usefulness of school
for their personal future. For example, Mroczkowski and Sánchez (2015) found
among urban, low-income Latina/o students’ that experiences with racial discrimi-
nation by adults in the 9th grade predicted in grade 10th doubts about schooling
being important for their future employment and economic opportunities. Likewise,
D’hondt et al. (2016) showed that perceptions of ethnic discrimination by teachers
heightened a sense of academic futility among ethnic minority adolescents in Bel-
gium (e.g., “There is no use in working hard at school; a good job is not reserved
for people like me”). Taken together the research indicates that ER discrimination
can undermine minority students’ academic engagement because it diminishes their
sense of (future) control.

3.3 Need for a positive self

Discrimination conveys negative messages about the value of oneself and one’s
ER group. It tells people that they are not equally regarded and respected. This can
undermine a positive sense of self and result in insecure self-esteem (Harter 1999),
as has been found in a study among African American adolescents (Seaton 2010).
The lower self-esteem due to discrimination could also lead to the adoption of
performance-avoidance goals (Eccles and Wigfield 2002; Elliot 1999; Wigfield
and Cambria 2010). In that case students are mainly concerned with the possibil-
ity of failure that would confirm the negative images of themselves. Psychological
disidentification with the academic domain is another possible reaction towards ER
discrimination. Psychological disidentification is a “defensive detachment of self-
esteem from outcomes in a particular domain, such that feelings of self-worth are
not dependent on successes or failures in that domain.” (Major et al. 1998, p. 35).
In relation to the school domain, psychological disidentification implies that one’s
general self-esteem no longer, or only weakly, depends on educational performance.
There are several ways in which disidentification occurs and two processes are par-
ticularly important: devaluing the particular domain and discounting the validity
and diagnostic value of feedback in that domain (Major et al. 1998; Schmader et al.
2001).
First, the academic domain can be devalued so that outcomes received in that
context are no longer seen as relevant or important to how one feels about oneself.
Thus, the perception that one is subject to discrimination by teachers may lead to
discounting the importance of school performance as a basis for self-evaluation.

13
 M. Verkuyten et al.

Similarly, beliefs about restricted opportunities and injustices in society may lead
to psychological disidentification, whereby academic performance is no longer a
source for global self-worth (Schmader et al. 2001).
Second, discounting the validity and diagnostic value of feedback in a domain
might lead to psychological disidentification with that domain. Major et al. (1998)
showed experimentally that when undergraduate students were informed that a test
was racially biased, neither negative nor positive feedback after completion of the
test affected African American students’ self-esteem, whereas the self-esteem of
white students followed the direction of the feedback. Thus, ER minority group stu-
dents may disengage their self-feelings from academic performance when they have
reasons to think that performance feedback or outcomes are not diagnostic or valid
indicators of their abilities.
Research in the US context has found some supporting evidence for psycho-
logical disidentification among ER minority students and the two related processes
of devaluing the academic domain and discounting feedback (Major et al. 1998;
Osborne 1997). In the context of the Netherlands it was found that, perceived dis-
crimination in school was related to psychological disidentification but only among
ethnic minority adolescents (Verkuyten and Brug 2003). Furthermore, among both
minority and majority students, perceived diagnosticity of performance feedback
was negatively related to disidentification, especially for students with relatively
high educational performance. In another research in the Netherlands it was found
that higher perceived discrimination in minority (pre)adolescents can lead to global
self-worth being based less on performances and competencies in the academic
domain (Verkuyten and Thijs 2004). Importantly, this research tested the psycho-
logical disidentification hypothesis by including a measure of academic self-esteem.
According to the hypothesis, under conditions of perceived disadvantage the rela-
tionship between academic self-esteem and global self-worth should be affected, and
not the relationship between educational performance and academic self-esteem or
between performance and global self-worth. The findings of this research supported
this reasoning: under conditions of perceived discrimination, global self-worth was
less strongly derived from the academic self.

4 Coping strategies and academic (dis)engagement

It is important to recognize that discrimination experiences can sometimes prompt

ER minority students to increase efforts to productively deal with their negative cir-
cumstances. This is illustrated by findings from Eccles et al. (2006) who not only
asked African-American adolescents about peer and teacher discrimination but also
about expected future discrimination (“would it be harder for you to get ahead in life
because of your race?”). In addition to negative effects of school-based discrimina-
tion, they found that students who anticipated future racial discrimination responded
with stronger rather than weaker academic engagement (Eccles et al. 2006; see also
St-Hilaire 2002). This suggests that ER minority students can see academic engage-
ment and education as being instrumental for gaining personal control and develop-
ing a positive sense of self.

13
Discrimination and academic (dis)engagement of ethnic-racial…

Education can also be perceived as a route for overcoming the societal barriers
of negative stereotypes and discrimination. Social identity theory (Tajfel and Turner
1979) proposes that this strategy of ‘individual mobility’ is especially likely when
ethnic group boundaries are perceived to be relatively permeable, indicating that
membership in a high-status group can be achieved. There is supporting empirical
evidence for this proposition among ethnic minority youth (Verkuyten and Reijerse
2008) and also in research using cardiovascular measures which shows that being
discriminated is not always identity threatening but can also lead to a cardiovascular
response indicative of challenge with the related motivation to perform and improve
(Scheepers 2013; Scheepers and Derks 2016).
However, in many contexts group boundaries are rather impermeable (e.g.,
because of a ‘color line’) and negative stereotypes and discrimination are pervasive
in society, which makes it very difficult for individual minority members to improve
their personal position. Members of ethnic and racial minority groups, therefore,
also engage in various protective mechanisms in response to negative stereotypes
and experiences with discrimination (Crocker et al. 1998). These mechanisms have
the benefit of protecting their threatened social identity needs, but have the potential
cost of, for example, reduced effort to succeed and academic disengagement. A lon-
gitudinal study among African Americans entering college found that students made
external attributions to explain why their actual college performances were lower
than what they had expected (Van Laar 2001). These external attributions protected
their self-esteem but were associated with lower expectations for future perfor-
mances, and might, in the long run, lead to the loss of feelings of control. Another
way in which ER minority students can protect their threatened identity is to make
comparisons with other minority students rather than with majority group students
(Crocker and Major 1989). Minority students can protect feelings of belonging, con-
trol, and self-worth by making comparisons with students facing similar identity
threats, but these comparisons might also reduce academic effort and engagement.
A more collective way in which minority students who feel devalued in academic
contexts may protect their ER identity is by developing an oppositional culture in
which avoiding performance in school becomes group identity defining. Negative
stereotypes and perceived group discrimination relate to the minority group as a
whole and therefore involve a collective sense of ER identity threat. Social psy-
chological research indicates that these experiences can lead to a shared, normative
reaction of protective disengagement (Tajfel and Turner 1979). Working in the US
context, the anthropologist Ogbu (2003) suggested that continuing racial discrimina-
tion and perceived lack of societal opportunities might lead to an oppositional iden-
tity that is psychologically protective. His oppositional culture theory argues that
racial minority students contribute to their own poor educational performance by
developing a cultural identity in opposition to schooling. The belief that schooling
is controlled by the dominant group and does not pay off for racial minorities would
be central in the oppositional cultural frame of reference. Racial minority mem-
bers would face strong peer pressures to act within the boundaries of this cultural
frame and thereby support the collective struggle of their racial minority group: “To
behave in a manner defined as falling within a white cultural frame of reference is
to ‘act white’ and is negatively sanctioned” (Fordham and Ogbu 1986, p. 181). To

13
 M. Verkuyten et al.

avoid peer sanctioning, students would disengage from schoolwork and show low
effort to achieve. Importantly, an oppositional identity would only develop among
so-called involuntary minority groups that have a history of suppression (e.g., slav-
ery, colonization) and that can only compare their unfavorable conditions with the
dominant majority. Minority groups that themselves have decided to migrate (vol-
untary minorities) would tend to compare their condition to the often less favorable
situation in the country of origin. They would tend to view discrimination as a chal-
lenge to overcome and anticipate that school efforts will pay off.
In the United States, the oppositional culture theory has received extensive atten-
tion in educational sociology and there is an ongoing debate about the theory’s
claims (Downey 2008). Empirical research examines, for example, whether Afri-
can Americans (involuntary minority) show stronger signs of oppositional identity
than Asian and Hispanic immigrants (voluntary), and the dominant white group.
Some research findings seem to suggest that this is the case (Farkas et al. 2002), but
other findings raise doubts about the theory (e.g., Ainsworth-Darnell and Downey
1998; Harris 2006). For example, using data from the National Education Longitu-
dinal Study (NLES), Cook and Ludwig (1998) found that black adolescents did not
exhibit greater educational disengagement than white peers and that high-achiev-
ing blacks were more, rather than less, popular than low-achievers, and that black
honor society members were substantially more popular. Further, although achiev-
ing at lower levels than white students, black students have been found to report
stronger pro-school attitudes (Downey and Ainsworth-Darnell 2002). Additionally,
it is argued that oppositional school behavior would result from black adolescents
entering high school with poor school-related skills and limited experiences with
school success, rather than from the formation of peer groups that resist school goals
(Harris and Robinson 2007; Tyson 2002).
Outside of the US context the oppositional culture theory has found mixed
empirical support. For example, using data from a nationally representative survey,
Rothon (2005) examined the educational attitudes and attainments of black, Indian,
Pakistani and Bangladeshi students in Great Britain. Though some of the findings
were in the direction of the theory, the expected difference between more volun-
tary and involuntary minority students was not found. In a large-scale study among
adolescents in the Netherlands no clear evidence was found that ER minority stu-
dents support an oppositional culture either more or less than majority students (Van
Tubergen and Van Gaans 2016). Yet, oppositional identities were more likely in
more ethnically concentrated schools and among minority students who were older,
male and who attended a lower educational track.

5 Moderating factors: ER group identification and classroom context

Research findings on the association between perceived ER discrimination and aca-

demic engagement are not unequivocal. There are various methodological reasons
for this (e.g., samples, measures) but it also suggests that there are relevant indi-
vidual differences and contextual factors that moderate this association, such as stu-
dents’ goal orientation and degree of family and peer support (Seol et al. 2016).

13
Discrimination and academic (dis)engagement of ethnic-racial…

Positive relationships with, for example, parents and friends can buffer the effects
of discrimination and have a compensatory role (see Benner 2017; Wang and Hugu-
ley 2012). In addition to these important interpersonal relationships we briefly want
to draw attention to the possible moderating roles of individual differences in ER
group identification and of three classroom characteristics.

5.1 ER group identification

There are important individual differences in ER minority identification that can

play a moderating role in the associations between identity devaluation and aca-
demic engagement. This can either be a sensitizing or a buffering role (Begeny and
Huo 2017). The intergroup status and health model posits that a strong minority
identity provides a group-lens for perceiving and interpreting experiences as well as
a resource for coping with discrimination (Begeny and Huo 2017).
First, a strong minority identity forms a cognitive ‘lens’ through which experi-
ences are viewed and interpreted and which heightens one’s vigilance and sensitivity
to expressions of ER discrimination. Strengthening students’ minority group iden-
tification implies that group-based experiences, behaviors and outcomes become
more salient (Tajfel and Turner 1979), and that it becomes more likely to make attri-
butions to discrimination, especially in ambiguous situations (Major et al. 2003). For
example, stereotype threat situations tend to mentally activate negative stereotypes,
in particular for individuals who strongly identify with their stereotyped group. Fur-
ther, low and high identifiers respond to perceived threats to social identity differ-
ently because of the relevance that the group has to the self (Ellemers et al. 2002).
Devaluation experiences have a stronger psychological and behavioral impact for
higher identifiers. Additionally, oppositional culture theory argues that identifica-
tion with black peers would imply an oppositional identity that rejects school efforts.
School success would require becoming ‘raceless’ whereby mainstream educational
attitudes and values are more important than a connectedness with one’s racial iden-
tity (Fordham 1988).
Second, a strong connection to the ethnic or racial minority group can also be a
protective factor and a source of resilience that buffers the negative impact of preju-
dices and discrimination (Umaña-Taylor 2016; Wong et al. 2003). It has been argued
and found that minority group identification and the related feelings of group pride
and identity beliefs contribute to higher academic engagement in adolescents and
undergraduates (e.g., Altschul et al. 2006; Smalls et al. 2007; Urdan and Munoz
2012). For example, a strong ethnic identity has been found to help Latino male
adolescents who perceive discrimination to maintain a belief in the economic value
of education (Mroczkowski and Sánchez 2015). In their meta-review, Rivas-Drake
et al. (2014) found a small but significant overall association (r = 0.18) between
ethnic-racial pride with positive school attitudes and academic performance in ado-
lescents. It is not clear why exactly a strong minority identity can buffer academic
engagement from discrimination, but it might give students a sense of control, value,
confidence and purpose (Brown 2017). Thus individual differences in ER identity
appear to matter for individual differences in academic engagement by heighten

13
 M. Verkuyten et al.

vigilance to expressions of discrimination but also by buffering the negative impact

of discrimination.

5.2 Classroom characteristics

Mexican–American youth have been found to report less peer discrimination in

neighborhoods with higher compared to lower concentration of Mexican Americans
(White et al. 2014). However, not only the degree of discrimination but also how ER
minority students respond to it might depend on the situational context. Although
other contexts such as the home environment are clearly relevant as well, a focus on
the classroom context is important for educational scientists and for school-based
attempts to help minority youth deal with negative stereotypes and discrimination
experiences. Therefore, we discuss briefly the possible roles of three different class-
room factors: ethnic classroom composition, the student–teacher relationship, and
multicultural education.
First, there is no straightforward link between ethnic or racial classroom composi-
tion and negative stereotypes and discrimination. The reason is that diversity pro-
vides opportunities for conflicts between ER groups but also chances for intergroup
contact in which students get to know and like each other (Thijs and Verkuyten
2014). It is reasonable to expect, however, that the motivational implications of
school-based ER derogation depends on the ER backgrounds of one’s fellow stu-
dents. When ER minority students are a numerical minority in their school or class-
rooms, discrimination may hit them harder because there is less potential support
from co-ethnic peers. Related to this, a recent study found that perceived conflict
with their ethnic majority teachers undermined the classroom identification of eth-
nic minority children—but not ethnic majority children—and this was explained
by their ethnic underrepresentation in the classroom (Thijs et al. 2018). However,
it probably also matters whether one’s co-ethnic peers are discriminated against
as well. When students think that they are the only ones that are rejected based on
their race or ethnicity, they are more likely to blame themselves for this, with all due
negative consequences (Graham 2006). An interesting approach for examining the
role of fellow students is social network analyses (e.g., Stark 2011). These analyses
have great potential for understanding how the dynamics of social relations have
an impact on school adjustment and the ways in which ER minority students try
to deal with negative stereotypes and discrimination. By examining who hangs out
with whom and by taking into account the experiences of peers in the network, it is
possible to better understand when and how the ethnic and racial school composi-
tion matters for ER minority students’ academic engagement.
Second, classes in school also differ in the amount of support that minority stu-
dents receive from their teachers (Okonofua and Eberhardt 2015). Students’ inter-
personal relationships with their teachers can be an important factor that influences
how they react to racial or ethnic devaluation. These relationships are important for
academic engagement as they provide a sense of relatedness and help students to
internalize important academic norms and standards (Roorda et al. 2011). Addition-
ally, teachers can be an important source of self-esteem and self-confidence, and

13
Discrimination and academic (dis)engagement of ethnic-racial…

thereby protect students against rejection-related experiences. Bayram Özdemir and

Stattin (2014) conducted a longitudinal study among immigrant adolescents from 54
different origin countries living in Sweden. They showed that ethnic peer discrim-
ination was associated with lower school adjustment over time, and this link was
fully mediated by lower self-esteem. Importantly, however, the mediation effect was
not significant for children who reported positive relationships with their teachers.
Third, schools and school classes differ in the degree to which cultural diversity is
considered (Verkuyten and Thijs 2013). Multicultural education can protect against
the negative motivational impact of discrimination as it communicates to students
that unequal treatment is wrong and differences should be acknowledged. A longi-
tudinal analysis among early adolescent immigrant students in Germany revealed
that both the acknowledgment of cultural diversity and an emphasis on equality and
inclusion promoted school adjustment (Schachner et al. 2016a, b). Additionally, in
a study among ethnic minority adolescents in Belgium it was found that perceived
equal treatment at school predicted lower academic disengagement and also buffered
against the negative effects of discrimination and stereotype threat on engagement
and test performance (Baysu et al. 2016).

6 Future research and practical implications

We have proposed a conceptualization of the relation between discrimination and

academic engagement based on the notion of ER identity threat and three social
identity needs proposed in Identity Process Theory (Breakwell 1986; Vignoles
2011). Discrimination communicates the devaluation and rejection of one’s ER
minority identity which threatens a number of basic needs that can have implica-
tions for motivational processes. The model provides a social psychological frame-
work for understanding and empirically testing the social identity processes involved
in the impact of discrimination on academic (dis)engagement in future research.
Thus, the suggested processes and implications are meant as directions for further
work on the role of discrimination for ER minority students’ academic engagement
and performance. For example, it is important for future research to systematically
investigate different aspects of discrimination. A more detailed investigation of the
forms, targets and sources of these negative experiences might greatly improve our
understanding about why and when these experiences are identity threatening and
negatively or positively affect academic engagement (e.g., Benner and Graham
2013; Brown and Chu 2012).
Similarly, for understanding the impact of discrimination experiences it is impor-
tant to systematically consider and measure the different social identity needs that
are threatened (see Vignoles 2011; Vignoles et al. 2006). These identity needs can
be measured by self-reported feelings (Smeekes and Verkuyten 2013; Vignoles et al.
2006) but individuals are not necessarily aware of them. It has been suggested that
how strongly individuals implicitly strive to fulfil a particular need may not be the
same as how strongly they say they want to fulfil it (Vignoles 2011). It might be
that identity needs become more explicit and salient when they are threatened or
compromised, and this activation is likely to result in responses that try to satisfy

13
 M. Verkuyten et al.

these needs. This would mean that the presence of threatened identity needs can be
inferred from their predictable effects on academic motivation and disengagement.
However, strategies for coping with identity threats may be relatively automatic and
future studies could consider to examine the importance of social identity needs
using implicit measures.
The consideration of social identity needs is highly relevant from a practical per-
spective as well. To promote the academic adjustment of ER minority students, it is
crucial that teachers and other educational professionals understand and acknowl-
edge the importance of these needs and the different ways in which they can be
threatened. Needless to say, teachers should approach their minority students in
an open and non-biased manner. But this is easier said than done because teachers
might have unconscious biases which have negative consequences for their expecta-
tions and behaviors towards ER minority students (Van den Bergh et al. 2010). More
generally, school staff should create a non-biased and safe school environment, not
only by preventing and counteracting discrimination but also by helping students to
cope with these negative experiences and by preventing its debilitating effects.
In future research it is also important to systematically examine the (protective)
role of various individual factors as well as of school characteristics and family sup-
port (Brody et al. 2016). This would allow us, for example, to address the question
why some ER minority group students demonstrate resilience or unexpected optimal
educational outcomes in spite of being exposed to discrimination experiences, while
others do not. A resilience perspective makes the distinction between promotive fac-
tors, which compensate for the negative impact of discrimination, and protective
factors, which reduce the negative impact of this risk factor (Motti-Stefanidi and
Masten 2013). To obtain a comprehensive picture of the influences that contribute to
academic resilience, and to develop practical interventions to facilitate the academic
adjustment of ER minority students, various characteristics of individual students
and their different contexts (family, ethnic community, school, peers) need to be con-
sidered and assessed. It additionally is important to consider the mutual influences
between different settings, as well as higher-order interactions (see Bronfenbrenner
1979). It might be the case, for example, that close relationships with teachers only
protect against the negative impact of discrimination if minority parents are involved
with their children’s education. Without parents involvement, the role of teachers in
stimulating a sense of belonging, control and esteem might be more limited.
Cultural differences in parental support, parental educational aspirations and
parental monitoring might be important as protective and promotive factors. Like-
wise, there can be cultural group differences in perceived family obligations that
are related to better academic performance (e.g., Fuligni 2001; Perreira et al. 2010;
Tseng 2004) and which stimulate minority students to be academically engaged even
when (or perhaps especially when) they feel discriminated. For example, research in
Belgium (Phalet and Claes 1993) and the Netherlands (Verkuyten et al. 2001) has
demonstrated that ethnic minority and majority students indicate that educational
achievement is important for themselves individually, but in addition, achievement
of ethnic minority students is also connected to perceived family obligations.
Future research should also investigate developmental changes. With age
minority children are increasingly aware of ethnic and racial differences, and

13
Discrimination and academic (dis)engagement of ethnic-racial…

experiences with ER discrimination tend to increase as children enter adoles-

cence, especially for more covert and indirect forms of discrimination that require
more advanced cognitive skills to understand. And across adolescence, percep-
tions of peer discrimination appear to be relatively stable, whereas perceived
teacher discrimination tends to increase (Brown 2017). Increased understanding
of others’ cognitions, multiple classification skills, and more advanced forms of
moral reasoning are likely to be involved in the age-related differences and devel-
opmental changes in the perception and interpretation of discrimination experi-
ences (Brown and Bigler 2005; Seaton 2010). Furthermore, adolescents tend to
gradually develop a more stable and secure ER identity (Phinney 1989; Quintana
2007) and specific social identity needs (e.g. efficacy) might become more impor-
tant in the ER identity development (Verkuyten 2016). These changes in ethnic
identity might make adolescence more resilient but also more vigilant to expres-
sions of discrimination. Furthermore, adolescents undergo pubertal changes that
might make them more sensitive to the possibility of discrimination, and they
start to function in a larger number of social settings which increases the risk
of being confronted with discrimination. We have focused predominantly on
research among older children and adolescents and because of the lack of devel-
opmental research we did not systematically consider developmental changes.
Yet, future research on ER discrimination should examine these changes in rela-
tion to the proposed social identity needs and, for example, ethnic identity devel-
opment (Phinney 1989), the school context and parental support.

7 Conclusions

The number of studies on the impact of ER discrimination experiences on minor-

ity students academic engagement is relatively small. Furthermore, much of the
existing research fails to provide insights into the social identity mechanism
underlying the possible impact. We have proposed that minority students experi-
ence social identity threat when they perceive and experience ethnic or racial dis-
crimination. This is because individuals derive feelings of belonging, self-worth
and efficacy from their ER group membership (Vignoles 2011). Educational theo-
ries propose that these self-feelings are important for academic engagement and
performance.
There is little systematic knowledge about the nature of discrimination experi-
ences and whether and how their impact varies as a function of the type of experi-
ence, individual differences in ER identity importance, age, gender, ethnic group,
school characteristics, and the situational context. Yet, this knowledge is important
for formulating better educational practices and policies to support and enhance the
educational engagement and success of ER minority students. Future studies should
systematically examine why, when and for whom discrimination experiences are
identity threatening, and why, when and for whom they have detrimental or rather
motivating effects for academic engagement. We hope that our discussion provides
useful suggestions for future theoretical and empirical work in this area.

13
 M. Verkuyten et al.

References
Agnew, R. (2001). Building on the foundation of general strain theory: Specifying the types of strain
most likely to lead to crime and delinquency. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency,
38, 319–361.
Ainsworth-Darnell, J. W., & Downey, D. B. (1998). Assessing the oppositional culture explanation for
racial/ethnic differences in school performance. American Sociological Review, 63, 536–553.
Altschul, I., Oyserman, D., & Bybee, D. (2006). racial-ethnic identity in mid-adolescence: Content
and change as predictors of academic achievement. Child Development, 77, 1155–1169.
Armenta, B. E., & Hunt, J. S. (2009). Responding to societal devaluation: Effects of perceived per-
sonal and group discrimination on the ethnic group identification and personal self-esteem of
Latino/Latina adolescents. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 12, 23–39.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman and Company.
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as
a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 497–529.
Bayram Özdemir, S., & Stattin, H. (2014). Why and when is ethnic harassment a risk for immigrant
adolescents’ school adjustment? Understanding the processes and conditions. Journal of Youth
and Adolescence, 43, 1252–1265.
Baysu, G., Celeste, L., Brown, R., Verschueren, K., & Phalet, K. (2016). Minority adolescents in eth-
nically diverse schools: Perceptions of equal treatment buffer threat effects. Child Development,
87, 1352–1366. https​://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12609​.
Begeny, C. T., & Huo, Y. J. (2017). When identity hurts: How positive intragroup experiences can
yield negative mental health implications for ethnic and sexual minorities. European Journal of
Social Psychology, 47, 803–817.
Benner, A. (2017). The toll of racial/ethnic discrimination on adolescents’ adjustment. Child Develop-
ment Perspective, 11, 251–256. https​://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12241​.
Benner, A. D., & Graham, S. (2013). The antecedents and consequences of racial/ethnic discrimina-
tion during adolescence: Does the source of discrimination matter? Developmental Psychology,
49, 1602–1613.
Berkel, C., Knight, G. P., Zeiders, K. H., Tein, J. Y., Roosa, M. W., Gonzales, N. A., et al. (2010).
Discrimination and adjustment for Mexican American adolescents: A prospective examination
of the benefits of culturally related values. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 20, 893–915.
Breakwell, G. M. (1986). Coping with threatened identities. London: Routledge.
Brody, G. H., Miller, G. E., Yu, T., Bech, S. R. H., & Chen, E. (2016). Supportive family environments
ameliorate the link between racial discrimination and epigenetic aging: A replication across two
longitudinal cohorts. Psychological Science, 27, 530–541. https​://doi.org/10.1177/09567​97615​
62670​3.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Brown, C. S. (2017). Discrimination in childhood and adolescence: A developmental intergroup
approach. New York: Routledge.
Brown, C. S., Alabi, B. O., Huynh, V. W., & Masten, C. L. (2011). Ethnicity and gender in late child-
hood and early adolescence: Group identity and awareness of bias. Developmental Psychology,
47, 463–471.
Brown, C. S., & Bigler, R. (2005). Children’s perceptions of discrimination: A developmental model.
Child Development, 76, 533–553.
Brown, C. S., & Chu, H. (2012). Discrimination, ethnic identity, and academic outcomes of Mexican
immigrant children: The importance of school context. Child Development, 83, 1477–1485.
Buhs, E. S., Ladd, G. W., & Herald, S. L. (2006). Peer exclusion and victimization: Pro-
cesses that mediate the relation between peer group rejection and children’s classroom
engagement and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 1–13. https​://doi.
org/10.1037/0022-0663.98.1.1.
Butler-Barnes, S. T., Chavous, T. M., Hurd, N., & Varner, F. (2013). African American adolescents’ aca-
demic persistence: A strengths-based approach. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42, 1443–1458.
Byrd, C. M., & Carter Andrews, D. J. (2016). Variations in students’ perceived reasons for, sources of,
and forms of in-school discrimination: A latent class analysis. Journal of School Psychology, 57,
1–14.

13
Discrimination and academic (dis)engagement of ethnic-racial…

Chavous, T. M., Rivas-Drake, D., Smalls, C., Griffin, T., & Cogburn, C. (2008). Gender matters, too: The
influences of school racial discrimination and racial identity on academic engagement outcomes
among African American adolescents. Developmental Psychology, 44, 637–654.
Cogburn, C. D., Chavous, T. M., & Griffin, T. M. (2011). School-based racial and gender discrimination
among African American adolescents: Exploring gender variation in frequency and implications
for adjustment. Race and Social Problems, 3, 25–37.
Connell, J. P., & Wellborn, J. G. (1991). Competence, autonomy, and relatedness: A motivational analysis
of self-system processes. In M. R. Gunnar & L. A. Sroufe (Eds.), Self processes and development
(Vol. 23, pp. 43–77). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Cook, P. J., & Ludwig, J. (1998). The burden of “acting White”: Do Black adolescents disparage aca-
demic achievement? In C. Jencks & M. Phillips (Eds.), The black-white test score gap (pp. 375–
400). Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.
Coutinho, M. T., & Koinis-Mitchell, D. (2014). Black immigrants and school engagement: Perceptions of
discrimination, ethnic identity, and American identity. Journal of Black Psychology, 40, 520–538.
Crocker, J., & Major, B. (1989). Social stigma and self-esteem: The self-protective properties of stigma.
Psychological Review, 96, 608–630.
Crocker, J., Major, B., & Steele, C. (1998). Social stigma. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey
(Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (4th ed., Vol. 2, pp. 504–553). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
D’hondt, F., Eccles, J. S., van Houtte, M., & Stevens, P. A. J. (2016). Perceived ethnic discrimination by
teachers and ethnic minority students’ academic futility: Can parents prepare their youth for better
or for worse? Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 45, 1–15.
Deaux, K., Bikmen, N., Gilkes, A., Ventuneac, A., Joseph, Y., Payne, Y. A., et al. (2007). Becoming
American: Stereotype threat effects in Afro-Caribbean immigrant groups. Social Psychology Quar-
terly, 70, 384–404.
Downey, D. B. (2008). Black/white differences in school performance: The oppositional culture explana-
tion. Annual Review of Sociology, 34, 107–126.
Downey, D. B., & Ainsworth-Darnell, J. W. (2002). The search for oppositional culture among black stu-
dents. American Sociological Review, 67, 156–164.
Eccles, J. S., Adler, T. F., & Meece, J. L. (1984). Sex differences in achievement: A test of alternate theo-
ries. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 26–43.
Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of Psychol-
ogy, 53, 109–132.
Eccles, J. S., Wong, C. A., & Peck, S. C. (2006). Ethnicity as a social context for the development of
African-American adolescents. Journal of School Psychology, 44, 407–426.
Ellemers, N., Spears, R., & Doosje, B. (2002). Self and social identity. Annual Review of Psychology, 53,
161–186.
Elliot, A. J. (1999). Approach and avoidance motivation and achievement goals. Educational Psycholo-
gist, 34, 169–189.
Elliot, A. J., & Covington, M. V. (2001). Approach and avoidance motivation. Educational Psychology
Review, 13, 73–92.
Faircloth, B. S., & Hamm, J. V. (2005). Sense of belonging among high school students representing four
ethnic groups. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 34, 293–309.
Farkas, G., Lleras, C., & Maczuga, S. (2002). Comment: Does oppositional culture exist in minority pov-
erty peer groups? American Sociological Review, 67, 148–155.
Finn, J. D., & Zimmer, K. S. (2012). Student engagement: What is it? Why does it matter? In S. L.
Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp.
97–131). New York: Springer.
Fordham, S. (1988). Racelessness as a factor in Black’s students school success: Pragmatic strategy or
pyrrhic victory? Harvard Educational Review, 58, 54–84.
Fordham, S., & Ogbu, J. (1986). Black students’ school success: Coping with the “burden of acting
white”. Urban Review, 18, 176–206.
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept,
state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74, 59–109.
Fuligni, A. (2001). A comparative longitudinal approach to acculturation among children from immigrant
families. Harvard Educational Review, 71, 566–578.
Furrer, C., & Skinner, E. (2003). Sense of relatedness as a factor in children’s academic engagement and
performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 148–162.

13
 M. Verkuyten et al.

Gougis, R. A. (1986). The effects of prejudice and stress on the academic performance of Black-
Americans. In U. Neisser (Ed.), The school achievement of minorit children: New perspectives
(pp. 145–158). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
Graham, S. (2006). Peer victimization in school: Exploring the ethnic context. Current Directions in
Psychological Science, 15, 317–321.
Griffin, C. B., Cooper, S. M., Metzger, I. W., & Golden, A. R. (2017). School racial climate and the
academic achievement of African American high school students: The mediating role of school
engagement. Psychology in the Schools, 54, 673–688. https​://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22026​.
Harris, A. L. (2006). I (don’t) hate school: Revisiting oppositional culture theory of Black’s resistance
to schooling. Social Forces, 85, 797–834.
Harris, A. L., & Robinson, K. (2007). Schooling behaviors or prior skills? A cautionary tale of omit-
ted variable bias within oppositional culture theory. Sociology of Education, 80, 139–157.
Harter, S. (1999). The construction of the self. New York: The Guilford Press.
Hughes, D., Del Toro, J., Harding, J. F., Way, N., & Rarick, J. R. D. (2016). Trajectories of dis-
crimination across adolescence: Associations with academic, psychological, and behavioral
outcomes. Child Development, 87, 1337–1351. https​://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12591​.
Huynh, V. W., & Fuligni, A. (2010). Discrimination hurts: The academic, psychological, and physical
well-being of adolescents. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 20, 916–941.
Kaiser, C. R., & Pratt-Hyatt, J. S. (2009). Distributing prejudice unequally: Do Whites direct their
prejudice toward strongly identified minorities? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
96, 432–445.
Liebkind, K., & Jasinskaja-Lahti, I. (2000). The influence of experiences of discrimination on psy-
chological stress: A comparison of seven immigrant groups. Journal of Community & Applied
Social Psychology, 10, 1–16.
Liebkind, K., Jasinskaja-Lahti, I., & Solheim, E. (2004). Cultural identity, perceived discrimination,
and parental support as determinants of immigrants’ school adjustments: Vietnamese youth in
Finland. Journal of Adolescent Research, 19, 635–656.
Major, B., Quinton, W. J., & Schmader, T. (2003). Attributions to discrimination and self-esteem:
Impact of group identification and situational ambiguity. Journal of Experimental Social Psy-
chology, 39(3), 220–231.
Major, B., Spencer, S., Schmader, T., Wolfe, C., & Crocker, J. (1998). Coping with negative stereo-
types about intellectual performance: The role of psychological disengagement. Personality and
Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 34–50.
Masten, A. S. (2001). Ordinary magic: Resilience processes in development. American Psychologist,
56, 227–238.
McKown, C., & Weinstein, R. S. (2003). The development and consequences of stereotype conscious-
ness in middle childhood. Child Development, 74, 498–515.
Mendoza-Denton, R., Downey, G., Purdie, V., Davis, A., & Pietrzak, J. (2002). Sensitivity to status-
based rejection: Implications for African-American students’ college experience. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 896–918. https​://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.83.4.896.
Motti-Stefanidi, F., & Masten, A. S. (2013). School success and school engagement of immigrant
children and adolescents. European Psychologist, 18, 126–135.
Mroczkowski, A. L., & Sánchez, B. (2015). The role of racial discrimination in the economic value of
education among urban, low-income Latina/o youth: Ethnic identity and gender as moderators.
American Journal of Community Psychology, 56, 1–11.
Niemiec, C. P., & Ryan, R. M. (2009). Autonomy, competence, and relatedness in the classroom:
Applying self-determination theory to educational practice. Theory and Research in Education,
7, 133–144.
Ogbu, J. U. (2003). Black American students in an affluent suburb: A study of academic disengage-
ment. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Okonofua, J. A., & Eberhardt, J. L. (2015). Two strikes: Race and the disciplining of young students.
Psychological Science, 26(5), 617–624. https​://doi.org/10.1177/09567​97615​57036​5.
Osborne, J. (1997). Race and academic disidentification. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89,
231–241.
Pascoe, E. A., & Smart Richman, L. (2009). Perceived discrimination and health: A meta-analytic
review. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 531–554.

13
Discrimination and academic (dis)engagement of ethnic-racial…

Perreira, K., Fuligni, A., & Potochnick, S. (2010). Fitting in: The roles of social acceptance and discrimi-
nation in shaping the academic motivations of Latino youth in the US southeast. Journal of Social
Issues, 66, 131–153.
Phalet, K., & Claes, W. (1993). A comparative study of Turkish and Belgian youth. Journal of Cross-
Cultural Psychology, 24, 319–343.
Phinney, J. S. (1989). Stages of ethnic identity development in minority group adolescents. Journal of
Early Adolescence, 9, 34–49.
Powell, C. L., & Arriola, K. R. J. (2003). Relationship between psychosocial factors and academic
achievement among African American students. The Journal of Educational Research, 96,
175–181.
Quinn, D. M., Kallen, R. W., & Spencer, S. J. (2010). Stereotype threat. In J. F. Dovidio, M. Hewstone, P.
Glick, & V. M. Esses (Eds.), The Sage handbook of prejudice, stereotyping and discrimination (pp.
379–394). London: Sage.
Quintana, S. M. (2007). Racial and ethnic identity: Developmental perspectives and research. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 54, 259–270.
Reeve, J. (2012). A self-determination theory perspective on student engagement. In S. L. Christenson,
A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 149–172).
New York: Springer. https​://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7.
Reschly, A. L., & Christenson, S. L. (2012). Jingle, jangle, and conceptual haziness: Evolution and
future directions of the motivational construct. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie
(Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 3–19). New York: Springer. https​://doi.
org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7.
Richman, L. S., & Leary, M. R. (2009). Reactions to discrimination, stigmatization, ostracism, and other
forms of interpersonal rejection: A multimotive model. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 365–383.
Rivas-Drake, D., Seaton, E. K., Markstrom, C., Quintana, S., Syed, M., Lee, R. M., et al. (2014). Ethnic
and racial identity in adolescence: Implications for psychosocial, academic, and health outcomes.
Child Development, 85, 40–57.
Roche, C., & Kuperminc, G. P. (2012). Acculturative stress and school belonging among Latino youth.
Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 34, 61–76.
Roorda, D. L., Koomen, H. M. Y., Spilt, J. L., & Oort, F. J. (2011). The influence of affective teacher-
student relationships on students’ school engagement and achievement: A meta-analytic approach.
Review of Educational Research, 81, 493–529.
Rothon, C. (2005). An assessment of the “oppositional culture” explanation for ethnic differences in edu-
cational attainment in Britain. Sociology Working papers 2005-02. University of Oxford: Depart-
ment of Sociology.
Rotter, J. B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psy-
chological Monographs, 80, 1–28.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation,
social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68–78.
Sanchez, D., Whittaker, T. A., & Hamilton, E. (2016). Perceived discrimination, peer influence and sexual
behaviors in Mexican American preadolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 45, 928–944.
Schachner, M. K., Noack, P., Van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Eckstein, K. (2016a). Cultural diversity climate
and psychological adjustment at school: Equality and inclusion versus cultural pluralism. Child
Development, 87, 1175–1191.
Schachner, M. K., Noack, P., Van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Eckstein, K. (2016b). Cultural diversity climate
and psychological adjustment at school: Equality and inclusion versus cultural pluralism. Child
Development, 87, 1175–1191.
Scheepers, D. (2013). Studying social identity-based threats and challenges using cardiovascular meas-
ures. In B. Derks, D. Scheepers, & N. Ellemers (Eds.), Neuroscience of prejudice and intergroup
relations (pp. 243–259). New York: Psychology Press.
Scheepers, D., & Derks, B. (2016). Revisiting social identity theory from a neuroscience perspective.
Current Opinion in Psychology, 11, 74–78.
Schmader, T., Major, B., & Gramzow, R. H. (2001). Coping with ethnic stereotypes in academic domain:
Perceived injustice and psychological disengagement. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 93–111.
Schmitt, M. T., Branscombe, N. R., Postmes, T., & Garcia, A. (2014). The consequences of perceived
discrimination for psychological well-Being: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 140,
921–948.

13
 M. Verkuyten et al.

Seaton, E. K. (2010). The influence of cognitive development and perceived racial discrimination on
the psychological well-being of African American youth. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 39,
694–703.
Seol, K. O., Lee, R. M., Yoo, H. C., Park, J. E., & Kyeong, Y. (2016). Racial and ethnic socialization
as moderators of racial discrimination and school adjustment of adopted and nonadopted Korean
American adolescents. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 63(3), 294–306.
Shapiro, J. R., & Neuberg, S. L. (2007). From stereotype threat to stereotype threats: Implications of a
multi-threat framework for causes, moderators, mediators, consequences and interventions. Per-
sonality and Social Psychology Review, 11, 107–130.
Shorey, H. S., Cowan, G., & Sullivan, M. P. (2002). Predicting perceptions of discrimination among His-
panics and Anglos. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 24, 3–22.
Simiem, E. M. (2005). Race, gender and linked fate. Journal of Black Studies, 35(5), 529–550. https​://
doi.org/10.1177/00219​34704​26589​9.
Skinner, E. A., & Belmont, M. J. (1993). Motivation in the classroom: Reciprocal effects of teacher
behavior and student engagement across the school year. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85,
571–581.
Skinner, E. A., Zimmer-Gembeck, M. J., & Connell, J. P. (1998). Individual differences and the develop-
ment of perceived control. Monographs of the Society for Child Development, Vol. 63, Serial No.
254.
Smalls, C., White, R., Chavous, T., & Sellers, R. (2007). Racial ideology beliefs and racial discrimination
experiences as predictors of academic engagement among African American adolescents. Journal
of Black Psychology, 33, 299–330.
Smeekes, A., & Verkuyten, M. (2013). Collective self-continuity, group identification and in-group
defense. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49, 984–994.
Stark, T. (2011). Integration in schools: A process perspective on students’ interethnic attitudes and inter-
personal relationships. Groningen: ICS.
Stevens, G. W. J. M., & Thijs, J. (2018). Perceived group discrimination and psychological well-being in
ethnic minority adolescents. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 48, 559–570.
St-Hilaire, A. (2002). The social adaptation of children of Mexican immigrants: Educational aspirations
beyond junior high school. Social Science Quarterly, 83, 1026–1043.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel
(Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7–24). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Taylor, D. M., Wright, S. C., & Porter, L. E. (1994). Dimensions of perceived discrimination: The per-
sonal/group discrimination discrepancy. In M. P. Zanna & J. M. Olson (Eds.), The psychology of
prejudice: The Ontario symposium (Vol. 7, pp. 233–255). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Tenenbaum, H. R., & Ruck, M. D. (2007). Are teachers’ expectations different for racial minority than for
European American Students? Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 253–273.
Teny, C., Devleeshouwer, P., & Hanquinet, L. (2013). Educational aspirations among ethnic minority
youth in Brussels: Does the perception of ethnic discrimination in the labour market matter? A
mixed-method approach. Ethnicities, 13, 584–606.
Thijs, J., Keim, A., & Geerlings, J. (2018). Classroom identification in ethnic minority and majority stu-
dents: Effects of relationships and ethnic composition (re-submitted manuscript)
Thijs, J., & Verkuyten, M. (2014). School ethnic diversity and students’ interethnic relations. British
Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 1–21.
Tseng, V. (2004). Family interdependence and academic adjustment in college: Youth from immigrant
and US-born families. Child Development, 75, 966–983.
Tyson, K. (2002). Weighing in: Elementary-age students and the debate on attitudes toward schooling
among black students. Social Forces, 80, 1157–1189.
Umaña-Taylor, A. J. (2016). A post-racial society in which ethnic-racial discrimination still exists and has
significant consequences for youths sdjustment. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 25,
111–118.
Umaña-Taylor, A. J., Quintana, S. M., Lee, R. M., Cross, W. E., Jr., Rivas-Drake, D., Schwartz, S. J.,
et al. (2014). Ethnic and racial identity during adolescence and into young adulthood: An inte-
grated conceptualization. Child Development, 85, 21–39.
Urdan, T., & Munoz, C. (2012). Multiple contexts, multiple method: A study of academic and cultural
identity among children of immigrant parents. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 27,
247–265.

13
Discrimination and academic (dis)engagement of ethnic-racial…

Van den Bergh, L., Denessen, E., Hornstra, L., Voeten, M., & Holland, R. W. (2010). The implicit
prejudiced attitudes of teachers: Relations to teacher expectations and the ethnic achievement
gap. American Educational Research Journal, 47(2), 497–527. https​://doi.org/10.3102/00028​
31209​35359​4.
Van Laar, C. (2001). Declining optimism in ethnic minority students: The role of attributions and self-
esteem. In F. Salili, C. Chiu, & Y. Yi Hong (Eds.), Student motivation: The culture and context
of learning. New York: Plenum.
Van Tubergen, F., & Van Gaans, M. (2016). Is there an oppositional culture among immigrant adoles-
cents in the Netherlands? Youth and Society, 48, 202–219.
Vansteenkiste, M., Lens, W., & Deci, E. L. (2006). Intrinsic versus extrinsic goal contents in self-
determination theory: Another look at the quality of academic motivation. Educational Psy-
chologist, 41, 19–31.
Verkuyten, M. (1998). Perceived discrimination and self-esteem among ethnic minority adolescents.
The Journal of Social Psychology, 138, 479–493.
Verkuyten, M. (2002). Perceptions of ethnic discrimination by minority and majority early adoles-
cents in the Netherlands. International Journal of Psychology, 37, 321–333.
Verkuyten, M. (2016). Further conceptualizing ethnic and racial identity research: The social identity
approach and its dynamic model. Child Development, 87, 1796–1812. https​://doi.org/10.1111/
cdev1​25555​.
Verkuyten, M., & Brug, P. (2003). Educational performance and psychological disengagement among
ethnic minority and Dutch adolescents. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 164, 189–200.
Verkuyten, M., & Reijerse, A. (2008). Intergroup structure and identity management among ethnic
minority and majority groups: The interactive effects of perceived stability, legitimacy, and per-
meability. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 106–127.
Verkuyten, M., & Thijs, J. (2002). Racist victimization among children in The Netherlands: The effect
of ethnic group and school. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 25, 310–331.
Verkuyten, M., & Thijs, J. (2004). Psychological disengagement from the academic domain among
ethnic minority adolescents in the Netherlands. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74,
109–125.
Verkuyten, M., Thijs, J. (2013). Multicultural education and inter-ethnic attitudes: An intergroup per-
spective. European Psychologist, 18, 179–190.
Verkuyten, M., Thijs, J., & Canatan, K. (2001). Achievement motivation and academic performance
among Turkish early and young adolescents in the Netherlands. Genetic, Social, and General
Psychology Monographs, 127, 378–408.
Vignoles, V. L. (2011). Identity motives. In S. J. Schwartz, K. Luyckx, & V. L. Vignoles (Eds.),
Handbook of identity theory and research (pp. 403–432). New York: Springer.
Vignoles, V. L., Regalia, C., Manzi, C., Golledge, J., & Scabini, E. (2006). Beyond self-esteem: Influ-
ence of multiple motives on identity construction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychol-
ogy, 90, 308–333.
Walton, G. M., & Cohen, G. L. (2007). A question of belonging: Race, social fit, and
achievement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 82–96. https​://doi.
org/10.1037/0022-3514.92.1.82.
Wang, M. T., & Huguley, J. P. (2012). Parental racial socialization as a moderator of the effects of racial
discrimination on educational success among African American adolescents. Child Development,
83, 1716–1731. https​://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2012.01808​.x.
Weiner, B. (2000). Intrapersonal and interpersonal theories of motivation from an attributional perspec-
tive. Educational Psychology Review, 12, 1–14.
Wentzel, K. R., & Wigfield, A. (1998). Academic and social motivation influences on students’ academic
performance. Educational Psychology Review, 10, 155–175.
White, R. M. B., Zeiders, K. H., Knight, G. P., Roosa, M. W., & Tein, J.-Y. (2014). Mexican origin
youths’ trajectories of perceived peer discrimination from middle childhood to adolescence: Vari-
ation by neighborhood ethnic concentration. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 43, 1700–1714.
Wigfield, A., & Cambria, J. (2010). Students’ achievement values, goal orientations, and interest: Defini-
tions, development, and relations to achievement outcomes. Developmental Review, 30, 1–35.
Williams, K. (2001). Ostracism: The power of silence. London: Guildford.
Wolfgramm, C., Morf, C. C., & Hannover, B. (2014). Ethnically based rejection sensitivity and academic
achievement: The danger of retracting into one’s heritage culture. European Journal of Social Psy-
chology, 44, 313–326. https​://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2018.

13
 M. Verkuyten et al.

Wong, C. A., Eccles, J. S., & Sameroff, A. (2003). The influence of ethnic discrimination and ethnic
identification on African American adolescents’ school and socioemotional adjustment. Journal of
Personality, 71, 1197–1232.
Yeager, D. S., Purdie-Vaughns, V., Hooper, S. Y., & Cohen, G. L. (2017). Loss of institutional trust
among racial and ethnic minority adolescents: A consequence of procedural injustice and a cause
of life-span outcome. Child Development, 88, 658–676. https​://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12697​.

Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published
maps and institutional affiliations.

Maykel Verkuyten is a professor in Interdisciplinary Social Science and the academic director of the
European Research Center on Migration and Ethnic Relations (Ercomer) at the Faculty of Social and
Behavioral Sciences at Utrecht University. His research interest is in ethnic identity, interethnic relations
and cultural diversity. The second edition of his book “The social psychology of ethnic identity” was
published by Routledge in 2018.

Jochem Thijs is an associate professor at the Department of Interdisciplinary Social Science at Utrecht
University (The Netherlands) and a researcher at the European Research Center on Migration and Ethnic
Relations (Ercomer). His research interests include children’s group relations in educational contexts, and
the educational adjustment of ethnic minority children and adolescents.

Nadya Gharaei is a doctoral researcher at the Center for Social and Cultural Psychology of the University
of Leuven (Belgium). Her research interests include the social identities of ethnic minority and majority
youth in diverse schools, and how the contextual (de)valuation and meaningful contents of social identi-
ties may impact school adjustment and personal well-being.

13
View publication stats