Ethnicity Flashcards
African- Caribbean Students:
Are generally lower achievers in terms of GCSE and A-levels compared with other ethnic groups.
In 2014, only 47% of A-C students achieved 5+ , C- Gvses compared with the national average of 56%
Black Male students
Are the group most likely to be excluded from school
Chinese and Indian students
Out-perform every other ethnic group at GCSE and A-level.
In 2014 , 74.4% of Chinese and 72.9% of a Indian students attained 5+, A*, C- GCSEs
Pakistani students:
Perform the most poorly among Asian ethnic groups.
In 2014 only 51.4% of Pakistani students achieved 5+, A*, C- GCSEs
Gypsy/Roma students:
Are the lowest achievers in terms of GCSEs compared with other ethnic groups .
I’m 2014, only 8.2% achieved at least five 5+, A*, C- GCSEs
White boys:
ESPECIALLY THOSE ON FREE SCHOOL MEALS, generally make less progress in schools compared with other ethnic groups
Girls in all ethnic groups
Do better than boys 😼
2016 RESEARCH BY THE CENTRE FORUM found that:
While ahead at age five, white students slip into 13th place behind those of Chinese, Indian, Asian and black African heritage by the time they sit their GCSEs at age 16.
SUPPORTING STUDY OF ETHNIC-MINORITY CHILDREN Guy Palmer (2010)
Found that nearly half of ethnic-minority children live in low income families compared with a quarter of white children.
SUPPORTING STUDY OF ETHNIC-MINORITY CHILDREN The Equality of Human Rights Commissions (2010)
Found that White British, Bangladeshi and African-Caribbean boys who qualify for FSM are half as likely than other groups to get good GCSE results; they are twice as likely to be permanently excluded from school
SUPPORTING STUDY OF ETHNIC-MINORITY CHILDREN Ireson and Rushforth (2005)
Found that ethnic minority parents from higher sociology-economic backgrounds can afford to hire private tutors for their children
Material Deprivation
Material deprivation theory considers the role of social class and poverty in ethnic-minority students’ experience of school
THE ROLE of material deprivation
- Ethnic minorities in the Uk are more likely to be in poverty because they are more likely to be unemployed or in low-paid jobs
- They are more likely to live in poor housing in economically depressed areas, which experience severe social problems
- Children’s experience of this deprivation as well as racism, undermines their educational performance
EVALUATING STUDY - ETHNICITY SND EXTERNAL FACTORS- Gillborn CHALLENGES ethnic deprivation (2015)
He observes that white children in poverty measured by the number who claim free school meals (FSM) are 3x more likely to achieve five GCSEs compared with Gypsy and Roma Children.
Cultural deprivation theory
Focuses on the home background of ethnic minorities
The role of cultural deprivation
— Asian, Chinese, African families : children benefit from cultures and parents that value educations
— African- Carribean families — young males underachieve because of a lack of positive adult role models and the negative influence of a hyper-masculine peer culture encouraged by rap music and street gang, which puts PRESSURE on boys to be anti-school
SUPPORTING STUDY OF CULTURAL DEPRIVATION - Tony Sewell (1997)
African-Caribbean boys brought up by single mums lack the discipline provided by fathers and may be attracted by gang culture, which rejects academic values
SUPPORTING STUDY OF CULTURAL DEPRIVATION Ruth Lupton (2004)
Asian children, especially those from a Muslim backgrounds,have a diligent work ethic because their parents expect children to be respectful towards adults.
++parents are always generally supportive of school behaviour policies and sanctions
EVALUATION OF CULTURAL DEPRIVATION - William Labov (1972)
— He argues that teachers are to blame for any educational underachievement experienced by black children because they fail to understand that black inner-city culture is different , rather than deficient
— He argues teachers make little attempt at understanding language of young urban black people (Labov calls BEV - Black English Vernacular)
— Labov argues that the problem lies with the school system and teachers - who’s re unfairly discriminating against black culture and language
Gillain Evans (2006)
- Argues that the underachievement of white working-class boys living in poor families in inner cities is more of a social problem than tonic underachievement
- White boys’ achievements have declined as aspirations have decreased
- she argues that educational success is often not valued by a working-class street culture shaped by both: poverty and violence.
LABELLING OF BLACK STUDENTS - Interactionalist
Interactionalists claim that teachers rarely label black students as ‘ideal students’. Rather, they suggests that some teachers are guilty of racist labelling of black students, especially boys.
LABELLING OF BLACK STUDENTS - Gillborn snd Youdell (2000)
Argue that white female teachers have low expectations of black boys’ potential academic performance and classroom behaviour.
These boys were put into lower streams or sets
LABELLING OF BLACK STUDENTS - Connolly (1988)
Found that black girls were often labelled as potentially disruptive but good at sport, which meant that teachers often did not focus on their academic ability.
LABELLING OF ASIAN STUDENTS- Gillborn (2008)
White middle-class students, as well as the ‘model’ minorities such as Chinese and Indian students are labelled as ‘ideal students’ because of their positive attitudes towards school
LABELLING OF ASIAN STUDENTS - Wright (1992)
Found that some teachers openly labelled Asian culture as inferior to British culture.
Often assume that Asian pupils are poorer
Black boys may respond by withdrawing into anti-school subcultures characterised by:
Hyper-masculinity and a desire to be more disruptive - EXAMPLE OF A SELF-FULFILLING PROPHECY
STUDENT LABELLING -Tony Sewell (1997)
Argues that despite teacher stereotyping, most black boys are NOT a problem at school.
Fuller’s (1984)
Study of black girls found that they valued academic success but this did not mean that they valued academic success but this did not mean that they liked their teachers.
There anger motivated them to do better.
EVALUATION of labelling theory
Often based on observation of classroom. BACKED BY QUALITATIVE INTERVIEW DATA
Observation may prove artificial
Widespread racism among teachers is highly unlikely - subscribe to professional ethics that forbid them from expressing such views.
Evaluation of labelling theory - SEWELL (1997)
Argues that the real causes of black boys’ educational achievement lay outside school
E.G POVERTY, LACK OF FATHER FIGURE/ CONFORMIST MAKE ROLE + PEER PRESSURE.
institutional racism
The hidden, unconscious, and unintended discrimination embedded in admissions and opportunities policies, the marketing of the school, the curriculum and staffing
GILLBORN (2008) suggest that institutional racism:
Suggests this produces a form of deep-rooted and ‘locked-in’ discrimination and inequality which is self-perpetuating
MARKETISATION - Gillborn and Youdell (1999)
according to marketisation, teachers neglect students labelled as ‘no-hopers’ and ‘high achievers’ to focus on the borderline students
EVIDENCE FOR MARKETISATION- UCAS
suggested that white students with similar A-level results are more successful than ethnic minority students at gaining places at university
Ethnocentric curriculum
Coard (2005) argues that what is taught in schools mainly reflects white culture. Black culture, music and art are largely ignored. Black students may view the knowledge taught as irrelevant or insulting and consequently switch off
EVIDENCE FOR ETHNOCENTRIC CURRICULUM - Tikly’s (2006)
Study found that African-Caribbean students were aware of their invisibility in the curriculum and were frustrated by the focus on white people and Europe
Staffing
There may be a lack of positive ethic-minority role models (teachers) in schools.
SEWELL sees this as the main in-school cause of the underachievement of black boys.
EXAMPLES OF STAFFING
17% of students in the UK are from black, Asian and ethnic-minority backgrounds, but only 7% of teachers are
EVALUATION OF institutional racism
— The educational achievements of some ethnic-minority groups E.G Chinese and Indian students, are well ABOVE the national average
— Girls in nearly AL PL ethnic groups perform better than boys
—There is little evidence that ethnic minority children experience low self-esteem
— Social factors outside school such as family background, poverty, racial discrimination by employers, policing etc might be more important.
