1.2 Education - Social Class (Internal) Flashcards
What is LABELLING?
To attach meaning or
definition to an
individual. E.g.
teachers may label a
pupil as bright or thick,
troublemaker.
INTERACTIONIST (Social Action) sociologists are particularly interested in labelling and they
investigate the face- to-face interactions between individuals and how people attach meanings to labels
and the effect this then has on the people who are labelled.
LABELLING:
Becker
Interviewed 60 Chicago high school teachers, he found they judged pupils based on how far they fitted the image of the ‘ideal pupil’.
Pupils’ work, appearance and conduct were key factors influencing teacher’s judgements. Teachers saw pupils from middle-class backgrounds as being the ideal pupil whilst working-
class students were seen as being the furthest away from ideal and they
regarded them as badly behaved.
A03:
The notion of the ideal pupil varied according to the social class make- up of the school.
1.In a largely working-class school where discipline was a problem the ideal pupil was defined as quiet, obedient and passive – the children were defined in terms of their behaviour not ability.
- In a largely middle-class school where there were few discipline problems the ideal pupil was defined in terms of personality and academic ability.
LABELLING:
Rist
According to RIST labelling occurs right at the beginning of a child’s education as he studies American Kindergartens. He found that teachers used information about a child’s home background and appearance to place them into groups, seating each group at a different table.
The groups were as follows:
THE TIGERS – fast learners – mostly middle-class and clean appearance – they were seated nearest to her.
THE CLOWNS AND THE CARDINALS – two groups seated furthest away from he. They were more likely to be working-class – they were given low level books and fewer opportunities to show their ability.
What is the SELF FULFILLING PROPHECY?
A self-fulling prophecy is a prediction that comes true simply because it has been
made. Interactionists argue labelling pupils affects their achievement by creating
self-fulling prophecies.
STEP ONE – the teacher labels the pupil (e.g. as being intelligent), they then make
predictions based on the label (e.g. they will make outstanding progress)
STEP TWO – the teacher treats the pupil accordingly, as if the prediction is already true (e.g. by giving them more attention and expecting higher standards)
STEP THREE – the pupil internalises the expectation which becomes part of their self-concept so they actually become the kind of pupil they were expected to be. The pupil gains confidence, so in turn tries harder and is successful. The prediction is fulfilled.
SELF-FULFILLING PROPHECY:
Rosenthal and Jacobsen
In their study (experiment) of a school they told the school they had a new test to identify those pupils who would ‘spurt’ ahead. In reality it was just a normal IQ test.
They tested all the pupils then picked 20% of them randomlyand told the school they were the ‘spurters’. On retuning ayear later they found that 47% of those identified had in fact made significant process.
They suggested the teacher’s beliefs about the pupils had
had significant impact on their achievement as the teachers had conveyed their belief about their ability and as such the students has internalised those beliefs.
SELF FULFILLING PROPHECY:
AO3
labelling theory has been criticised as being too deterministic – that is that it assumes that all children that are labelled will fulfil their prophecy and became that label. A study by FULLER
in topic three shows us otherwise.
Marxists in particular are critical of labelling theory as they ignore wider structural inequalities that create the labels and stereotypes – in other words where do the teachers get their labels
from? They argue labels are not the product of teachers’ individual opinion but wider societal influences that reproduce class inequalities.
What is STREAMING?
Streaming involves putting children into ability groups or classes called ‘streams’. Each class is then taught
separately. Studies show that self-fulling prophecies are particularly likely to occur when children are streamed.
STREAMING:
Becker
As BECKER found teachers are likely to see working-class pupils as not ideal
and have low expectations and subsequently put them into lower streams.
Once a child is streamed it is difficult to then move up to higher streams as they are locked into their
teachers’ low expectations of them. They get the message that they have been written off as no hopers.
On the other hand middle-class pupils tend to benefit from streaming as their teachers believe them to
be ideal pupils and have higher expectation of them and subsequently place them in higher streams.
As a result they gain higher levels of confidence, work harder and improve their grades.
STREAMING:
Gillborn and Youdell
They found teachers are less likely to see working-class (and black) pupils as having ability. As a result they are more likely to be placed in lower streams and entered for lower level GCSEs. It then denies them access to knowledge and opportunity and widens the class gap further.
They link this to the publishing of exam league tables, this ranks schools based on performance. If a school has a good position they attract more students and as such get more funding.
This creates an A-C economy in schools where they focus their time and effort on those capable of getting Cs in a bid to boost league table positions.
As a result GILLBORN AND YOUDELL argue schools go through a process called
‘EDUCATIONAL TRIAGE’. This literally means sorting students into three categories:
Those who will pass anyway, Borderline C/D pupils, hopeless cases.
What are PUPIL SUBCULTURES?
A pupil subculture is a group of pupils who share similar values and behaviour patterns. Pupil subcultures often emerge as a
response to the way pupils are labelled and in particular as a response to streaming.
PUPIL SUBCULTURES:
Lacey
LACEY uses concepts of differentiation and
polarisation to explain how subcultures in schools
emerge:
DIFFERENTIATION – the process in which teachers categorise pupils according to perceived ability, attitude/ ability. Streaming is a form of differentiation.
POLARISATION – is the process in which pupils respond to streaming by moving towards one of
two opposite poles. In LACEY’S study he found that streaming led to pro-school and anti-school
subcultures.
PRO-SCHOOL:
Pupils in high streams (largely middle-class) tend to remain committed to the values of the school, They gain their status from approved channels – academic success.
ANTI-SCHOOL:
Those in lower streams (largely working-class) suffer a loss of self-esteem by being viewed as being inferior. As they are not achieving status through the approved channels they opt for alternative ways of gaining status. This usually involves inverting the rules (turning them upside down). Instead of getting status from their teachers they get it from their peers, by for example cheekiness to teachers, not doing homework, smoking etc.
PUPIL SUBCULTURES:
AO3: Ball
BALL researched a school that was in the process of abolishing streaming he found that in this school
the basis for pupils to polarise into subcultures was largely removed and the influence of the anti-
school subculture declined.
However he found whilst polarisation disappeared teachers still differentiated pupils and were more
likely to label middle-class pupils as ideal. This in turn still led to middle-class pupils achieving as they
internalised those positive beliefs of teachers which led to self-fulfilling prophecies.
So even when streaming is removed class inequalities remain.
PUPIL SUBCULTURES:
AO3: WOODS
WOODS found that pupils did not just respond in the two ways identified above,
instead there were a variety of responses:
- INGRATIATION – being teachers’ pet
- RITUALISM – going through the motions staying out of trouble
- RETREATISM – daydreaming and mucking about.
- REBELLION – outright rejection of everything the school stands for
Students may move in and out of the responses depending heavily on teachers and subjects.
PUPIL CLASS IDENTITIES:
Archer et al.
ARCHER ET AL. look at interactions between social groups and school.
ARCHER argues those that have similar HABITUS to the teachers e.g. MIDDLECLASS receive
SYMBOLIC CAPITAL – status from teachers as they have the same values as the school.
Those students who do not e.g. WORKING CLASS experience SYMBOLIC VIOLENCE – Bourdieu
refers to this as being process in which schools withhold symbolic capital for working –class students
as they see their tastes as being inferior.
Because of this clash working-class students view the educational world as being alien.
ARCHER found that working class pupils felt that to be successful they had to change how they both
presented themselves and talked, and often said middle-class spaces such as universities and
professional careers were not for them.
Many WORKING CLASS pupils felt society and school looked down on them. This symbolic violence led them to create their own status by constructing class identities for themselves, investing in “styles” through branded clothing such as “Nike”. ARCHER calls these NIKE IDENTITIES.
Style performances were policed by peers, not conforming could lead to
“social suicide”. The right appearance earned “symbolic capital” and brought safety from bullying.
NIKE IDENTITIES:
Archer et al.
Nike styles also play a part in working class pupil’s
rejection of higher education:
Unrealistic: because it was not for “people like us” but for richer, posher, cleverer people. They saw university as unaffordable and a risky investment.
Undesirable: because it would not “suit” their preferred lifestyle. For example didn’t want to live off a student loan because they wouldn’t be able to afford their street styles.
Archer et al. working class
identities are not just a cause of marginalisation in education, they also express their positive preference for a particular lifestyle.
Therefore they may seek self-exclusion from school, activity choosing to reject education because it doesn’t fit their identity.
