Class Differences In Achievement INTERNAL Flashcards
What is labelling?
- small scale
- study face to face interactions
- interested in how people attach labels to one another and the effects this has
Which sociologists have carried out studies on labelling?
Interactionist sociologists
How do interactionist sociologists carry out a study on labelling?
- small scale
- study face to face interactions
- interested in how people attach labels to one another and the effects this has
How do teachers label students?
They label pupils based on stereotyped assumptions about their class background, w/c negatively and m/c positively
Beckers (1971) study
- study on labelling
- based on interviews with 60 Chicago high school teachers
- found they judged people on how far they fit the image of an ideal student
- pupils work, conduct & appearance were key factors in influencing teachers judgements
- m/c as closest to ideal and w/c furthest away as they regarded them as badly behaved
Hempel-Jorgensen (2009) study
- studied 2 English primary schools
- in a large w/c school where discipline was a problem, the ideal student was defined as quiet & obedient (children defined in terms of behaviour not academic ability)
- m/c school with few discipline problems, ideal student was defined in terms of personality & academic ability
Dunne and Gazely (2008) study
- argued schools persistently produce working class underachievement because of labels
- interviews in 9 state secondary schools
- found teachers normalised w/c underachievement and seemed unconcerned about it and that they couldn’t do anything about it
- however felt they could overcome m/c underachievement
- reason for this difference was the teachers belief in the role of pupils home backgrounds (w/c parents uninterested, m/c parents supportive)
Rist (1970) study
- studied an American kindergarten
- teacher used info about children’s home background & appearance to place them in separate groups
- ‘tigers’ = fast learners, m/c, neat appearance, seated nearest to teacher and given encouragement
- ‘clowns and cardinals’ = seated further away, w/c, given lower level tasks
What is the self fulfilling prophecy?
A prediction that comes true simply because it has been made
Stages of the self fulfilling prophecy:
- Teacher labels pupil and makes predictions
- Teacher treats the pupil accordingly
- Pupil internalises the teachers expectation and becomes the kind of pupil the teacher believed them to be and therefore the prediction is fulfilled
Rosenthal and Jacobson (1968) study on the SFP
- studied a primary school in California to show how the sfp worked
- told school they had a test designed to identify pupils who would spurt ahead however it was actually an iq test but teachers believed what they were told
- tested all children but picked 20% at random and said they would be spurters
- returned to the school a year later and found 47% of those identified as spurters had made significant progress
Rosenthal and Jacobson conclusions
- concluded the teachers beliefs about the student had been influenced by the supposed test results
- teachers conveyed these beliefs to students through their interactions with them
- simply by accepting the prediction that some pupils would spurt ahead, they brought it about
Strength of the labelling theory
Studies useful in showing that schools can actively create social class differences in achievement and that they aren’t neutral institutions as assumed by cultural deprivation theorists
Limitation of labelling theory
- deterministic as it assumes students who have been labelled have no choice but to fulfil the prophecy and will inevitably fail
- criticised by Marxists for ignoring the wider structures of power within which labelling takes place (blames teachers for labelling but fails to explain why they do so)
- labels aren’t a result of teachers prejudices but stem from the fact teachers work in a system that reproduces class divisions
What is streaming?
Separating children into different ability groups/classes
Becker (streaming)
- teachers dont see w/c pupils as ideal pupils and tend to see them as lacking ability and have low expectations so are placed in a lower stream
- once streamed, its difficult to move up higher so children in lower streams tend to give up and accept failure
- creates sfp as pupils live up to their teachers low expectations of them by underachieving
- m/c benefit from streaming as they are placed in higher streams as teachers view them as ideal pupils (gain confidence and work harder to improve grades)
Who proposed the idea of the a to c economy and educational triage?
Gillborn and youdell 2001
A to C economy
System where schools focus time, effort and resources on the pupils who they see as having the potential to get 5 grade c’s and therefore boost the schools league table position
Exam league tables
These rank each school according to its exam performance
Schools need to achieve a good league table position to attract pupils and funding
Gillborn and youdell (a to c economy)
- teachers use stereotypes of ability to stream pupils
- less likely to see w/c as having ability and are placed in lower streams and entered for lower tier GCSEs
- denies them the opportunity to gain good grades and widens class gap in achievement
Educational triage (sorting)
A to c economy produces educational triage and pupils categorised into 3 types:
1. Those who will pass and can be left to get on with it
2. Those with potential (helped to get a C)
3. Hopeless cases doomed to fail
- view w/c as the hopeless cases producing sfp and failure
- need to gain a good league table position drives educational triage and becomes the basis for streaming (w/c in lower streams, recieve less attention, low levels of achievement)
What is a pupil subculture?
Group of pupils who share similar values/behaviour patterns
- often emerge from labelling/streaming
Who came up with the idea of differentiation and polarisation?
Colin Lacey 1970
Differentiation
Process of teachers categorising pupils according to how they perceive their ability/behaviour
Polarisation
Process in which pupils respond to streaming by moving towards one of 2 opposite poles/extremes
What are the 2 pupil subcultures?
- anti school
- pro school
Pro school subculture
- high streamed
- committed to the values of the school
- gain status through academic success
- tend to be m/c
Anti school subculture
- low streams
- tend to be w/c
- low self esteem due to school undermining them and reinforcing inferior status
- invert schools values of hard work, obedience, punctuality
- gain status among peers (truanting, not doing homework)
Who studied a school that abolished streaming?
Ball 1981
Ball’s study (abolishing streaming)
- found when school abolished banding, students polarising into subcultures was largely removed & anti school subculture declined
- however differentiation continued (teachers categorised pupils with m/c as more able, positive labelling reflected in better exam results)
Who argued that there are a variety of pupil responses to labelling/streaming?
Woods 1979
Ingratiation
Being teachers pet
Ritualism
Going through the motions and staying out of trouble
Retreatism
Daydreaming/not focusing
Rebellion
Rejection of everything the school stands for
Furlong 1984
Observed that pupils aren’t committed to one response and may act differently in different lessons with different teachers
What is habitus?
The learned ways of thinking, acting and being that are shared by a particular social class
- includes their tastes and preferences about lifestyles and consumption and their outlook on life
Who introduced the concept of habitus?
Bourdieu
Archer 2010
Used bourdieus concept of habitus to understand the relationship between w/c pupils identities and school and how this produces underachievement
Habitus and class
- M/c has the power to define its habitus as superior and impose it on the education system
- school puts higher value on m/c preferences
- linked to cultural capital as school has m/c habitus giving m/c pupils an advantage and w/c viewed as inferior
Symbolic capital definition
The status, recognition and worth we are able to obtain from others especially those of a similar class position to us
Symbolic violence definition
The harm done by denying someone symbolic capital
Symbolic capital overview
- schools have m/c habitus so pupils who have been socialised at home into m/c preferences gain symbolic capital and are deemed to have worth/value
Symbolic violence overview
- schools commit symbolic violence by devaluing w/c pupils habitus and w/c preferences are deemed worthless
- defining the w/c as inferior reproduces the class structure and keeps the w/c ‘in their place’
- archer found that w/c pupils felt that they had to change the way they presented themselves to be educationally successful and they felt as if they couldn’t access m/c spaces like uni/professional careers
What are Nike identities?
A way for w/c pupils to create self-worth, status and value.
They did so by constructing meaningful class identities for themselves by investing in styles and consuming branded clothing like Nike.
Nike identities overview
Why was style important in school?
- style performances were heavily policed by peer groups and not conforming was ‘social suicide’
- right appearance earned symbolic capital and approval from peer groups (safety from bullying)
- m/c see Nike identities as tasteless whereas w/c see it as a way of generating symbolic capital and self worth
Problem with Nike identities
- led to conflict with schools dress code
- schools = m/c habitus, teachers opposed street styles and pupil who adopted this style risked being labelled negatively
Nike identities and higher education
- Nike identities played a part in w/c’s rejection of higher education
- unrealistic: for m/c (clever,posh) and unaffordable
- undesirable: wouldn’t suit their preferred habitus
Archers findings on Nike identities?
- nike identities show the w/c’s preference for a particular lifestyle
- w/c may choose self exclusion from education as they believe education is not for the likes of them and therefore choose to reject it as it doesn’t fit in with their lifestyle/habitus
Who studied self exclusion?
Evan’s 2009
Evan’s (self exclusion)
- studied w/c girls studying for their a levels
- reluctant to apply to elite unis (oxbridge) as they felt a sense of hidden barriers and a fear of not fitting in
- Bourdieu: w/c think oxbridge is not for them due to their habitus
- the girls had a strong attachment to their locality
- shows m/c education system devalues w/c and they feel forced to either maintain w/c identities or abandon w/c identities and conform to m/c habitus to succeed
Relationship between internal and external factors
- w/c habitus may conflict with schools m/c habitus resulting in symbolic violence
- w/c pupils using restricted code may be labelled as less able leading to sfp
- poverty may lead to bullying which can cause truanting, absences and failure
