Education: Ethnicity Flashcards
internal factors: labelling and teacher racism
interactionists look at the labels teachers give to different ethnic backgrounds. Their results show teachers see Asian and Black pupils as being far from the ideal students. black students= disruptive
Asian students= passive
internal factors: labelling and teacher racism
Black pupils and discipline
Gillbon and Youdell (2000) stated teachers were quicker to discipline black students in comparison to other groups. this is due to racial expectations they saw their behaviour as challenging. when teachers act on this, the student becomes defensive which leads to conflict.
this could explain the high levels of exclusion for black pupils. these boys also suffer from exclusion from class and referrals to the PRU (pupil referral unit)
black pupils are normally put in a lower stream = negative stereotypes = self-fulfilling prophecy.
internal factors: labelling and teacher racism
Asian pupils
studies have shown teachers can be ethnocentric and assume all students have the same cultural experience. teachers may assume student’s language is poor and could exclude students from classroom discussions.
internal factors: pupils identities
teachers often see ethnic groups as not ideal. ARCHER (2008) said there were 3 types of student
ideal: white middle class, heterosexual, have natural ability and initiative.
pathologised pupil identity: Asian, feminised identity, conformist, and succeed due to hard work not ability.
demonised: black or white working class, hyper-sexualised identity, unintelligent, peer-led, and a culturally deprived underachiever.
internal factors: pupils identities
chinese students
ARCHER (2008) argues even when ethnic minorities perform successfully they can still be classed as abnormal. Chinese students while successful were seen as achieving success through hard work, rather than academic ability.
teachers stereotype Chinese families as tight to explain girls’ supposed passivity and teachers often wrongly assumed Chinese pupils were middle class.
internal factors: pupils responses and subcultures
if teachers label students, they themselves can respond in different ways: they can become withdrawn and disruptive or they could decide to prove the stereotypes wrong and work even harder. negative labels do not always lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy.
internal factors: pupils responses and subcultures
Fuller: rejecting negative stereotypes
a study of black girls in a comprehensive school in London. these girls were high achievers in a school where most black girls were in a lower stream. they channeled their frustrations into their studies, not looking for teacher approval or other girls. these girls succeeded even when they refused to conform therefore showing negative labelling does not always lead to failure.
AO3: Mac an Ghail conducted a study of black and Asian A-Level students that supports Fuller’s study. how you respond to a negative label depends on ethnic group, gender, and the nature of the school.
internal factors: pupils responses and subcultures
Mirza: failed strategies to avoid racism
Mirza found teachers often gave poor advice to black students regarding career paths, discouraging them from applying to professional careers. she identified 3 types of teacher racism:
1. the colour blind - teachers believe all students are equal but in practice allow racism to happen unchallenged.
2. the liberal chauvinist - teachers who believe black pupils are culturally deprived and therefore have lower expectations of them.
3. the overt racist - teachers who believe black students are inferior.
this means students were selective about which staff they asked for help, getting on with their work, and avoiding class discussions.
internal factors: pupils responses and subcultures
Sewell: boys responses
Sewell identified 4 types of students depending on how they dealt with teacher racism.
1. rebel: the most visible and influential group, but only a small minority. often excluded from school, anti-authority, anti-school, macho lads. they believed they were superior based on their sexual experiences. they saw white boys as effeminate.
2. conformist: the largest group, keen to succeed, accepted school, they were anxious to not be stereotyped by teachers.
3. retreatists: a tiny minority disconnected from black subcultures and the school subculture.
4. innovator: 2nd largest group, pro-education but anti-school.
even though the rebels make up a small group, teachers saw them as the norm.
internal factors: institutional racism
schools, colleges, and teachers can unconsciously discriminate against ethnic groups. there are 2 types of racism:
individual racism: prejudice views of individual teachers
institutional: discrimination built into a school/college.
the critical race theory sees racism as engrained into society. this is subtle and originates from respectable structures in society. this inequality feeds itself as it is historical.
Moor and Davenport (1990) said the marketization of schools meant they could be selective e.g. application forms are difficult for non-English speakers to fill in. these procedures favour white students, therefore ethnic minorities are more likely to end up in unpopular schools.
internal factors: institutional racism
ethnocentric curriculum
this is institutional racism for example the curriculum ignores non-European languages, non-British history, literature, and music. History as a subject glorifies the empire whilst ignoring Black and Asian history. this can undermine black and Asian students as it leads to low self-esteem and failure. however, others argue whether this has a real impact as Indian and Chinese students perform above the national average.
white students are 2x more likely to be identified as G&T compared to black students.
black students are more likely to be entered into a lower exam tier.
teachers make setting assumptions on appearance, conduct, and ISQ = black students - lower set.
internal factors: institutional racism
criticisms
internal factors such as setting and assessment cause a minority pupil to fail, especially young black boys. Sewell rejects this view as he argues racism may not have disappeared from schools totally, but is enough to cause failure. he said internal factors such as anti-school attitudes, peer groups, and the role of the father are far more influential.
Model minorities: how can schools be racist if some groups perform so well? Gillborn (2008) states that Chinese and Indian students make the most of the educational opportunities they are given. excuses are made for the minorities who don’t succeed, such as ‘unaspirational’. it also ignores the fact Chinese students report the same level of harassment as black students.
external factors: cultural deprivation
intellectual and linguistic skills
this is seen to be a major contributing factor to under-achievement. they argue many children from low-income black families lack intellectual stimulation and enriching experiences. this means they are poorly equipped at school because they do not have reasoning and problem-solving skills.
language can act as a barrier for black low-income families as their language skills can be ungrammatical, disjoined, and unable to express abstract ideas.
also, children who do not speak English at home may be held back academically. however, statistically, this is not seen as a significant issue as students with EAL are only 3% below English speakers when looking at Maths & English GCSE passes.
external factors: cultural deprivation
attitudes and values
failure to socialise children leads to a dysfunctional family. some sociologists argue because black families are more likely to be headed by women there is a lack of a male breadwinner as a role model and they struggle financially. the New Right agrees with this concept of a lack of positive role models and some even suggest it is an example of failure to accept British culture.
Pryce (1979) compared black and Asian groups. Asian groups are more resistant to racism and have a greater self-esteem. Black families are less cohesive and less resistant to racism, therefore more prone to self-esteem and underachievement. Pryce looks at it from an evolutionary point of view and states that slavery was devastating as they lost their language, religion, and entire families. whereas Asian family structures, religion, and languages remained intact.
Sewell states it isn’t an issue of absent fathers that causes black underachievement but a lack of tough nurturing love. this lack of love means boys find it difficult to overcome emotional and behavioral difficulties in adolescence. in the absence of nurturing fathers, gangs offer love and loyalty. these gangs give boys role models, masculinity, and an anti-school ideal. many young boys interviewed by Sewell said their biggest barrier in education was peer pressure. he states black children need to have greater expectations placed upon them to raise their expectations. However Gillborn (2002) states institutional racism of the education sector causes failure.
external factors: cultural deprivation
evaluation
- it ignores the positive effects ethnicity can have on attainment. black Caribbean families provide positive role models for girls. Driver (1977) argues this is why girls do better in education than boys.
- Lawrence disagrees with Pryce and states black students fail not because of low self-esteem but due to racism within education.
- Keddie sees cultural deprivation as blaming the victim. She argues these groups are culturally different not culturally deprived. they underachieve because schools are ethnocentric.
- many critics see compensatory education as another way of imposing white values on children who already have their own culture. there are 2 alternatives: multicultural education which tries to include and value other cultures and anti-racist education which is a policy that challenges prejudice and discrimination in schools.
