labelling/ subcultures

Question 1

Dunne and Gazeley (2008)

Answer 1

• interviewed in 9 english secondary schools
• teachers normalised w/c pupils’ underachievement
• they were unconcerned about w/c underachievement but felt they could help m/c underachievement
• working class pupils who were underachieving were given easier exams
• middle class pupils who were underachieving were given extension work
• w/c pupils were underestimated and were labelled as ‘overachieving’ if they were doing well.
• the way that teachers explained and dealt with underachievement constructed class differences

Question 2

Rist 1970- kindergarten

Answer 2

• studied an american kindergarten
• the teacher labelled the fast learners as ‘tigers’, who were more likely to be middle class and have a neat appearance
• these were seated in a group closest to her and given the most encouragement
• the other 2 groups were labelled by the teacher as ‘clowns’ and ‘cardinals’, who were likely to be working class
• these groups were seated further away from her and given lower level books, as well as less chances to show their abilities (group reading rather than individual)

Question 3

Rosenthal and Jacobsen (1965) + impact on students achievement

Answer 3

• method: tested the school based on IQ, but said it would identify students who would “spurt ahead”- 20% were selected randomly and told that they were the spurters
• those who were told they were sputters made significant academic progress (47% of them)
• effect was greater on younger students

impact on students’ achievement?
- the teachers conveyed their beliefs about the students being spurters through interactions (body lang, attention + encouragement)
- by doing this, the teachers brought about what they were told would happen

Question 4

labelling

Answer 4

to attatch as meaning or definition to a pupil such as ‘bright’ or ‘troublemaker’

Question 5

self fulfilling prophecy

Answer 5

living up to the label attached to oneself

Question 6

halo effect

Answer 6

effect created by accepting the (positive) label

Question 7

ideal pupil

Answer 7

an image held by teachers of the kind of pupils they like to teach

Question 8

master status

Answer 8

defined by the label attached (usually bad)

Question 9

micro theory

Answer 9

study of society on a small scale (for example looking at a small sample to find out what they really think/do)

Question 10

Becker (1971)

Answer 10

• interviewed 60 chicago high school students
• students judge as good/ trustworthy based on the image of an ideal pupil
• this was based on appearance, pupil’s work and behaviours

Question 11

Lacey: polarisation and differentiation

Answer 11

• differentiation= teachers categorise pupils according to how they percieve their ability, for example streaming
• polarisation= pupils respond to streaming by moving towards two opposite poles (pro-school or anti-school)
• the high streams respond positively (pro-school) to their labelling as higher ability because this gives them status, whereas low streams cause polarisation into anti-school subcultures because they are put into a low status and try to gain status among peers by making mischief.

Question 12

Gilbourn and Youdell argue that streaming happens due to the A-C economy
what is the A-C economy?

Answer 12

schools focus their time, effort and resources on the pupils who are likely to get 5A*-C grades to boost the school’s position on the league tables
(impact of marketisation- need to be appealing to potential investors)

Question 13

Jo Boaler- effects on seperating students by ability

Answer 13

• 4 year longitudinal study monitorign the maths learning of students in 6 UK schools
• about 1/3 of students in the highest ability groups were disadvantaged by this, due to high expectations, fast-paced lessons and pressure to succeed. This was most prominent on the most able girls
• students from numerous groups said that they had given up on maths when they found out that their teachers had been preparing them for exams that would only get them the lowest grades, they were dissatisfied with the limits that had been placed on them.
• social class influenced setting decisions, meaning that disproportionate numbers of w/c students were given low sets, even after ‘ability’ was considered
• significant amounts of students found the pace of the set they were in difficult to work with: for some it was too slow, so they were dissatisfied, for some it was too high, so they were anxious. Both of these resulted in a lower attainment than would be expected, given their attainment when first entering the school.

Question 14

Ingram (2009)- m/c values of the education system

Answer 14

• two groups of white w/c catholic boys in highly deprived neighbourhood
• one group passed their 11+ and were at grammar school, the other did not and went to a local secondary school
• the neighbourhood’s dense network of friends and family was part of the boys’ habitus and sense of belonging.
• w/c communities place great emphasis on conformity, so pressure to fit in.
• grammar school boys experience tension between w/c neighbourhood habitus and m/c school habitus
• one boy, Callum was ridiculed by his classmates for wearing a tracksuit on non-uniform day, because he was trying to fit into the w/c neighbourhood’s habitus, but was undervalued by the m/c school’s habitus due to this
• ingram observes that this means they have to choose between unworthiness either at school or at home.

Question 15

Evans (2009)- w/c girls’ view of uni

Answer 15

• group of 21 w/c girls from a South London comprehensive (a-levels)
• many were reluctant to apply to elite unis due to a sense of hidden barriers + not fitting in

Question 16

What did Bordieu say about habitus and self exclusion?

Answer 16

• working class people think of places like oxbridge as ‘not for the likes of us’
• this feeling comes from their habitus, which includes their beliefs about what opportunities really exist for them.
• as a result, working class students exclude themselves from elite universities because this thinking becomes a part of their identity

Question 17

Reay on self-exclusion

Answer 17

self-exclusion from elite or distant universities narrows opportunities and limits success

Question 18

How are Ingram, Evans and Archer linked?

Answer 18

they have all shown that the middle class education system devalues working class choices as worthless and inappropriate

Question 19

Nike identities

Answer 19

• many pupils were concsious that society + school looked down on them, this symbolic violence made them seek self-worth and status by constructing their own meaningful class identities.
• they did this by heavy interest in styles, such as branded clothing like Nike.
• they chose Nike because it showed a clear differentiation between upper class Gucci and ‘just Nike’
• this was very gendered: girls had a hyper-heterosexual style
• dressing how they policed each other to gave oneself symbolic capital and safety from bullying
• this clashed with the school’s dress code- they were labelled as distasteful and rebellious (this reflects the m/c habitus of the school)

Question 20

What did Archer find about Nike identities?
(hint: linked w/ views of higher education)

Answer 20

• the school’s m/c habitus stigmatises w/c pupils’ identities
• Nike styles play a part in w/c pupils’ rejection of higher education
• they saw it as unrealistic: they would not fit in because it isn’t ‘for the likes of us’- it was for richer and smarter people. they also saw it as unaffordable and a risky investment
• they saw it as undesirable: it wouldn’t suit their preferred habitus, living on a student loan would not allow them to afford the street styles that defined their identity

Question 21

what can habitus be defined as in the context of labelling?

Answer 21

learned ways of thinking and acting shared by a social group

Question 22

summary of Archer et al (2016)

Answer 22

• w/c girls felt they had to ‘lose themselves’ to fit into education
• university and profesional careers seemed closed off because they “wouldn’t fit in.”

Question 23

Mac an Ghail- w/c masculinity

Answer 23

• observed two groups: academic achievers and new enterprisers, who both have their own definition of masculinity
• these subcultures were developed in response to a number of factors
• in summary, the academic achievers were the upper levels of the working class, who recieved better treatment and positive labelling.
• they were also in the top sets and believed that education would lead to success and a professional career
• the new enterprisers believed that the school curriculum was positive, they chose vocational subjects and saw themselves in a future of the highly skilled sector of the workplace

Question 24

Farzana Shain

Answer 24

• asian, mostly pakistani girls, economically deprived 4 groups:

1. the gang girls:
- opposedschool’s culture, saw it as white and racist
- fought back to abuser
- labelled as underachievers and put in low sets
- emphasis on asian subculture and withdrawal from the other students, traditional female asians

2. the survivors:
- conformed to values of school for success
- experienced racism and sexism despite this

3. the rebels:
- critical of unequal gender relations in their home community and in the gang girls’ subculture

4. the faith girls:
- priority is religion
- have a survival strategy to succeed academically
- integrate with other ethnic groups

Question 25

Gerwitz et al

Answer 25

• the amount of choice in choosing a school was limited by both the availibility of schools and the parents’ ability to choose between them.
• parents are not equal in this respect, having 3 distinct groups

1. privelaged/skilled choosers:
- strongly motivated to choose a school for their children and have the skills to.
- they can understand the nature of different schools and evaluate the claims schools make in marketing
- devote lots of time and energy
- often have the money to make a range of choices that will help their child’s education
- usually middle class

2. semi-skilled choosers:
- strong inclination but limited capacity to engage with the market
- as involved as skilled choosers but do not have the same skill level
- they lack experiences or inside knowledge of the school system, and the social contacts and culutral skills to choose “effectively”

3.disconnected choosers:
- not inclined to get very involved in the educational market
- they are concerned about their children’s welfare and education but do not consider many options
- only consider the closest 2 schools to where they live and believe there is little difference
- more emphasis on the happiness of the child than on the academic reputation of the school
- likely to send their children local, where their friends are rather than further away to a supposedly better school
- likely to be w/c

Summary:
- the higher a person’s social class, the more likely they are to benefit from the best state schooling (or be able to choose private schooling).
- the market=a hierarchy of schools and even without academic selection, this leads to a growing divide between predominantly m/c and w/c schools

Question 26

BALL et al

Answer 26

the encouragement of parental choice, the publication of exam results in league tables, open enrolment, formula funding and other policies designed to make education more market-oriented have all served to make it less egalitarian.
those with the advantage are gaining more benefits while those with the disadvantage are losing further ground