INTERNAL FACTORS: class differences in achievement Flashcards
internal factors
factors INSIDE school: interactions between pupils and teachers and inequalities between schools
SUBCULTURES
a group whose attitudes differ from mainstream culture
CLASS DIFFERENCES IN ACHIEVEMENT (INTERNAL FACTORS)
- LABELLING (attach meaning to someone)
BECKER
Studies show that TEACHERS LABEL STUDENTS REGARDLESS of their ABILITY+ ATTITUDE. INSTEAD, they LABEL pupils off of STEREOTYPES BASED on their CLASS BACKGROUND; W/C pupils are LABELLED NEGATIVELY + M/C pupils are LABELLED POSITIVELY.
BECKER carried out a STUDY on LABELLING. BASED on INTERVIEWS with 60 CHICAGO HIGHSCHOOL TECAHERS, he found they JUDGED PUPILS ACCORDING to how CLOSE they fit the ‘IDEAL PUPIL’ IMAGE. PUPIL’S APPEARANCE + WORK INFLUENCE TEACHER’S JUDGEMENTS; THEY SAW M/C PUPILS CLOSELY FIT THE ‘IDEAL PUPIL’ IMAGE + W/C PUPILS AS FURTHEST AWAY FROM IT.
HOWEVER DIFFERENT SCHOOLS MAY HAVE DIFFERENT VIEWS OF THE ‘IDEAL PUPIL’. AMELIA found that W/C ASPEN PRIMARY SCHOOL, where DISCIPLINE WAS A BIG ISSUE, the IDEAL PUPIL was seen as QUIET,PASSIVE+OBEDIENT, DEFINED BY BEHAVIOUR. In COMPARISON, M/C ROWAN PRIMARY SCHOOL, where DISCIPLINE WAS NOT AN ISSUE, the IDEAL PUPIL was DEFINED by PERSONALITY + ABILITY RATHER THAN BEHAVIOUR.
CLASS DIFFERENCES IN ACHIEVEMENT (INTERNAL FACTORS)
- THE SELF- FULFILLING PROPHECY (ROSENTHAL+JACOBSON)
PREDICTION that comes true SIMPLY by VIRTUE OF IT BEING MADE. LABELLING AFFECTS PUPIL’S ACHIEVEMENT BY CREATING A SFP.
A teacher labels a student and makes a prediction about them. The teacher treat the pupil accordingly, acting as if the label is already true. The pupil internalises the teacher’s expectation, becomes their self-image, and thus fulfils the label.
ROSENTHAL + JACOBSON showed the SFP AT WORK. They told the school they had a test that IDENTIFIED PUPILS who would SPURT (this WAS NOT true, the test was a basic IQ yet the teachers believed them). The researchers tested all the pupils and picked 20% at RANDOM and identified them as ‘SPURTERS’. When they RETURNED as year later, they FOUNF that 47% of the SPURTERS had made SIGNIFICANT PROGRESS. ROSENTHAL+JACOBSON see that TECAHER’S BELIEFS about PUPILS HAD BEEN INFLUENCED their ‘TEST RESULTS’. TECAHERS EXPRESSED THESE BELIEF THROUGH HOW THEY INTERACTED WITH PUPILS: BODY LANGUAGE+ HOW MUCH ATTENTION and ENCOURAGEMENT was GIVEN.
CLASS DIFFERENCES IN ACHIEVEMENT (INTERNAL FACTORS)
- STREAMING
SEPARATING children into DIFFERENT ABILITY GROUPS: ‘STREAMS’, they are TAUGHT SEPARATELY from others for ALL SUBJECTS.
Studies show the SFP is LIKELY TO OCCUR when CHILDREN ARE STREAMED.
BECKER shows teachers DO NOT see W/C pupils as the ‘IDEAL PUPIL’, they have LOW expectations of them and thus W/C pupils are found in LOWER STREAMS. ONCE STREAMED it is hard to move up to HIGHER STREAMS. Pupils in LOWER STREAMS ‘GET THE MESSAGE’ that their teachers had WRITTEN THEM OFF, creating a SFP as pupils live up to their TEACHER’S EXPECTATION of UNDERACHIEVEMENT. DOUGLAS found that pupils in LOWER STREAMS at 8 had a DECLINE in their IQ by 11. CONTRASTINGLY, M/C pupils BENEFIT from STREAMING, as they are LIKELY to be PLACED in HIGHER STREAMS and SEEN as the IDEAL PUPIL. This results in a DEVELOPMENT of a POSITIVE SELF-CONCEPT and from that WORK HARDER+IMPROVE THEIR GRADES.
CLASS DIFFERENCES IN ACHIEVEMENT (INTERNAL FACTORS)
PUPIL SUBCULTURES: LACEY
a GROUP who SHARE SIMILAR VALUES that are DIFFERENT from MAINSTREAM CULTURE.
PUPIL SUBCULTURES occur as a RESPONSE to how PUPILS have been LABELLED + PARTICULARLY A REACTION TO STREAMING.
LACEY uses the CONCEPT of DIFFERENTIATION+POLARISATION to explain PUPIL SUBCULTURES.
DIFFERENTIATION: process of TEACHER’S CATEGORISING PUPILS by their PERCEIVED ABILITY+ATTITUDE. eg, STREAMING as it CATEGORISES pupils into SEPARATE CLASSES. Pupils DEEMED ‘MORE ABLE’ are GIVEN ‘HIHGER STATUS’ and placed in ‘HIGHER STREAMS’, those ‘LESS ABLE’ are placed in ‘LOWER STREAMS’+ GIVEN AN ‘INFERIOR STATUS’.
POLARISATION: process where PUPIL’S RESPOND to STREAMING by moving to ONE OF TWO OPPOSITE POLES. In his study of a BOY’S GRAMMAR SCHOOL, LACEY found that STREAMING POLARISED BOYS into a ‘PRO- SCHOOL CUBCULTURE’+’ANTI-SCHOOL SUBCULTURE’.
Pupils in HIGHER STREAMS (mainly M/C) tend to be COMMITTED to SCHOOL’S VALUES, GAIN STATUS by ACADEMIC SUCCESS, THUS FORM A PRO-SCHOOL SUBCULTURE. Those in LOWER STREAMS (mainly W/C) SUFFER a LOSS OF SELF-ESTEEM, in a position of INFERIOR STATUS which pushes them to GAIN STATUS ALTERNATIVELY through ANTI-SCHOOL SUBCULTURES: INVERTING school’s values by NOT doing homework, being DISRUPTIVE in class.
This CREATES FURTHER PROBLEMS, joining an ANTI-SCHOOL SUBCULTURE may BECOME A SFP of EDUCATIONAL FAILURE. HARGREAVES found a SIMILAR RESPONSE to LABELLING +STREAMING in a SECONDARY MODERN SCHOOL. The EDUCATION SYSTEM sees that BOYS IN LOWER STREAMS are TRIPLE FAILURES: FAILED THEIR 11+, PLACED IN LOWER STREAMS and LABELLED as ‘WORTHLESS LOUTS’. Pupils solved this STATUS PROBLEM by SEEKING OTHERS ALIKE and FORMING A GROUP where HIGH STATUS was GAINED by SUBVERTED THE SCHOOL’S RULES, which IN TURN GURANTEED their EDUCATIONAL FAILURE.
Other responses to LABELLING+STREAMING
WOODS:
INGRATIATION: ‘teacher’s pet’
RITUALISM: going through the motions and staying out of trouble
RETREATISM: daydreaming + messing about
REBELLION: rejection of school’s values
