class differences in achievement - internal factors Flashcards
how do teachers label students unfairly
teachers attach labels regardless of ability/attitude, labelling is based on stereotyping e,g class,race,ethnicity
explain beckers research
becker - interactionist study, 60 chicago HS teachers judge pupils by image of ideal pupil appearance, class,gender
teachers having different notions of ideal pupil
Hempel-Jorgensen WC PS =quiet,passive,obedient
MC PM =academic ability,personality
labelling in secondary schools
dunne, gazeley - underachievement in WC is normalised = low expectations
labelling in secondary schools
dunne, gazeley - underachievement in WC = normalised = low expectations so entered for low qualification
labelling in primary schools
rist= kindergarten shows, teachers use backgground info toarrange a seating plan MC= “tigers” + encouraged WC = read together not individually = “clowns
self-fulfilling prophecy in steps
step 1:teacher labels e.g….
step 2:teacher treat accordingly to label
step 3: internalisation, becomes part of identity
longitudinal study on self-fulfilling prophecy
rosenthal,jacobson - IQ tests
20% at random - label= smart 47% improved IQ score - teacher support
what is streaming
separating on general academic ability
WC = low stream, labelled negatively, difficult to get out of stream sticky label
effects of streaming
streaming = self fulfilling prophecy douglas- lower stream at age 8 = suffer decline in iq at 11 (opposite for MC)
A-C economy and streaming
gillborn and youdell -WC and black - low stream regardless of ability (stereotypes), entered for low exams denied of knowledge and opportunity to gain qualifications of true potential
the educational triage groups
group 1: ignored, they will survive
group 2: will fail anyway, hopeless
group 3:potential for c or better (WC)
what is differentiation
differentiation - teachers caterogising pupils on own perceptions(streaming)
what is polarisation
pupils response to differentiation - moving into 2 diff poles, pro +anti
pro-schools subculture groups values and attitudes
high streams(MC) , committed to values of school, status through academic achievement
anti-school subcultures values + their attitudes and values towards school
low streams (WC), school undermines their self-worth, label of failure, alternative ways of status from peers
lacey quote
the boy who takes refuge in such a group because his work is poor find that the group commits him to a behaviour pattern which means his work will stay poor- and in fact gets progressively worse
hargreaves and subcultures in boys
triple failures fail 11+, low streams, “ worthless louts” so form delinquent subculture
abolishing streaming to stop polarisation and differentiation
ball- when streaming is abolished, polarisation was reduced. differentiation not reduced SFP continues
variety of pupil responses to labelling and streaming
ingratiation - teachers pet
ritualism - staying out of trouble
retreatism - daydreaming/being silly
rebellion - rejection of ET school stand for
pupils not being committed to a set response
furlong - pupil not committed to response, act diff with other teachers
criticism of labelling theory - determinism
deterministic - states pupils have no free will but to accept and fulfill prophecy - FULLER STUDY
criticism of labelling theory - marxism
marxists - labelling not from teachers prejudices, stems from system that is unfair + reproduces class inequality
habitus meaning
thinking, being, acting shared by class, tastes, preferences, on lifestyle + consumption
superiority in class habitus
MC = superior, so culture imposed at school, higher value on MC tastes+ preferences
who gains symbolic capital
MC status and recognition by school, WC devalued, tastes + preferences = worthless
withholding of symbolic capital
symbolic violence. wc values = inferior, keeps wc in their place so WC see world of education as unnatural + alien
with symbolic violence how do WC seek self worth
construction of meaningful class identities investing in brands - Nike right appearance = symbolic capital
Nike and WC constructed subcultures clashing with schools values
symbolic capital from peers but, conflict with dress code. school = MC values stigmatise WC values labelled as rebels
nike styles in rejection of higher education
unrealistic, “not for people like us” unaffordable, risky investment
undesirable - debt doesnt allow afford style that is their identity
having WC identity is inseparable from belonging to a working class locality
ingram - 2 groups + secondary school grammar school = MC habitus (deprived area)
belonging to WC locality =inseparable from having WC identity, neighbourhood dense networks key part of habitus. experienced tension between habitus of WC and culture of grammar school
WC cultures being collectivism and conformity
ingram ; WC have high conformity ‘fitting in’ is a necessity, problem for wc grammar school boys, due to tensions of habitus of wc neighbourhoods
Callum, boys experiencing tensions of wc and mc children due differences in culture
Callum, ridiculed by classmates (MC grammar school) for wearing tracksuit, fitting in with neighbourhood, unworthiness at home or school.
nicola ingram -
culture tensions, WC boys want to fit in, (conformity) with neighbourhood but receive stigma from MC boys
Callum and symbolic violence - working class identity
callum ridiculed for wearing tracksuit, (WC culture) by MC, devalue WC culture.
Maguire’s own experience in grammar school ——- symbolic violence
‘the working class cultural capital of my childhood counted for nothing in this new setting’
process of self exclusion in WC habitus
clashes between WC identity + habitus of higher education is a barrier to success due to process of self- exclusion
reluctancy to apply to elite universities
Evans- 21 WC girls from south L comprehensive school, reluctancy to oxbridge Bourdieu - Oxbridge = not for the likes of us , difference in habitus, exclusion
evans - attachment to locality narrowing achievement
4/20 girls wanted to move away for uni, Reay= self exclusion for elite uni narrows opportunity + success
evans, ingram, archers studies findings
MC education system devalues experiences of WC as inappropriate. so WC student have to choose maintaining WC identities or abandoning them in order to succeed
how is habitus interrelated in external and internal factors
WC habitus formed from outside school results in symbolic violence in education
how are speech codes interrelated in external and internal factors
WC using restricted speech code may be labelled as less able , leading to self fulfilling prophecy
how is dunne and gazeley study interrelate internaal and external factors
teachers make assumptions (external) of of WC pupils backgrounds (internal) causes underachievement
how do external factors interrelating in internal factors (processes within school e.g streaming, labelling)
external factors affect processes within school, in general e.g streaming gillborn and youdell study
