Might be interpreted as far fetched. Some may say it's impossible to isolate a factor like "stereotype threat" and control that in a lab, but across an array of studies inside and outside the lab, Steele convinces me that stereotype threats may have enough of an effect to not allow the person in question to do their best on any given task that is ability-stereotyped. I experienced this as the sole woman in a philosophy class and tried to understand why my ability seemed to lessen given one philosophy professor versus another. One gave me high praises, told me that I was fit for the major. While this lifted me up, it also made me feel skeptical. Can I trust his praise (women are often stereotyped as less able in philosophy and math like majors and careers)? I then performed significantly worse with a professor who I intuitively felt thought less of my abilities. Once he actually stated that I may be unfit, I began to prove him wrong (was it his acknowledgment of threat that allowed me to in turn acknowledge it and then gain power over it to defeat it?) Part of that is the narrative that was propagated and the way the feedback was delivered. There are huge implications in my role as a white teacher of majority black scholars. The narrative I elicit about themselves from them, the narratives I speak, my deliverance of feedback (meant to grow them into my high expectations), the ways I allow them to acknowledge stereotypes and offer another narrative IS huge. The idea that acknowledgment or simply stating a truth (reality of a threat) can actually diminish that threat or we can say, fear (speak it to gain power over it) is SIMPLE but completely LOGICAL and reproducible in Steele's studies and relevant in defeating the predicament of underperforming students (these students aren't lesser abled but so many other factors are at work to keep them there, one may being stereotype threat).

I appreciated he Steele made his research accessible in Whistling Vivaldi. This book looked at how stereotypes have a greater impact on our performance than we think, especially if that stereotype is negative, "women are not good at math." It made me think of the stereotypes we carry about ourselves and others and how it affects our interactions. I found the last section a bit hard to follow. Even if you are not a social psychologist like Steele I would still recommend this book if you are curious about stereotypes and the intersection of performance.

Stereotype threat has changed how I think about myself and others in social contexts. I see it in literature now- entire novels are written about how a character overcomes the debilitation of stereotype threat. After so many studies and so much nuance, I appreciated the concrete ideas educators can use to mitigate the threat and affirm multiple, intersecting identities.

As I was finishing this book it made me wonder how many white people who, in 2020, made the motions to pick up Black literature and anti-racist texts have actually read any of them. I’m sure some have. But I bet we can guess what the majority’s answer would be.

All that to not quite pat myself on the back but just to say how continually reading these words by non-white people rewires the brain to consider these things. That is the goal right? So it’s in that vein that reading this book felt both enlightening and, similarly to reading James Baldwin or W.E.B. Du Bois, in seeing just how the lessons haven’t been learned; depressing. At least, unlike (but not wrongly) so many other books, Whistling Vivaldi looks to give evidence and signposts (not solutions!) that can be marked to make some headway.

Naturally with any science I would say I’d like to follow up on what this book presents, seeing as it’s from 2010, to see if any further evidence has been found to support or refute what is seen here. But nothing the book reports seems out of line. With the only issue really being how early in the book Steele points out someone calling him out on not including disabilities as a contingent identity, and he failed to include that on the multitudes of identities on the cover I have. It’s a nitpick but in this world of attempting to make people welcome — of equity — it’s also important.

But it’s a fascinating book and I would recommend anyone read it. Steele keeps it engaging and presents each of his colleagues in a slight, but painted imagery that individualizes them and helps to feel like I’m in the lab and finding these data with them.

Really fascinating stuff. I really enjoyed Steele's methodical explanation of his research into stereotype threat and how all of us, in different ways, operate with a subconscious fear of how our performance/actions will be perceived as reflecting or confirming stereotypes against us. Steele walks us (in surprisingly painstaking detail) through experiments that show how stereotype threat works against us in a number of ways. His explorations range from, for example, under-performance by highly motivated African American students in college classes and women in science and math fields to white stress regarding whether or not an individual will be perceived as racist. It's a pretty interesting read, and Steele takes pains to point out how the research is showing hope for change as well.

I was excited that so many of my peers at work read this; I do wish we'd done a little more with it as a group, but at least we have some common ground now to work from and build from. Pretty illuminating.

Mediocre at best...Redundant but, from time to time, there are legitimate points to discover throughout the text. He could certainly use a better editor, but overall, it's a pretty average book.

This book goes up to 11.
Really everyone should give this book a read. The ideas regarding identity threat and stereotype bias are important on all of our daily lives. It is 10 years old so somethings are a bit out of date but it gave me so much to think about.