Education: Ethnic Differences Flashcards
Hastings (2006)
White pupils make less progress between 11 and 16 than black or Asian pupils, and it is possible that white pupils may soon become the worst performing ethnic group in the country.
Ethnic differences - External factors:
(Cultural deprivation)
Intellectual and Linguistic skills
Cultural deprivation theorists see lack of intellectual and linguistic skills as major cause of under-achievement for many minority children.
Believe many children from low income black families lack intellectual stimulation and enriching experiences which leaves them poorly prepared for school, as they haven’t developed reason and problem-solving skills.
Concern that children who do not speak English at home may be held back educationally.
Bereiter and Englemann (1966)
Believe language spoken by low-income black families to be inadequate for achieving educational success.
See it as ungrammatical, disjointed, and incapable of expressing abstract ideas.
Gilborn and Mirza (2000)
Found Indian pupils do very well despite often not having English as their home language.
Ethnic differences - External factors:
(Cultural deprivation)
Attitudes and Values
Cultural deprivation theorists argue that some black children have been socialised into a sub-culture that instills a fatalistic attitude that emphasises immediate gratification.
This discourages them from valuing education and leaves them equipped for success.
Moynihan (1965)
Argues that because many black families are headed by a lone mother, children are deprived of adequate care because of financial problems and being denied a male role model.
Saw cultural deprivation as a cycle where inadequately socialised children from unstable families go on to fail at school and become inadequate parents themselves.
Pupils of Chinese origin
top the national average, and do better than all other ethnic groups.
Sewell (2009)
Argues it is not absence of fathers as role models that leads black boys to underachieving.
Instead he sees the problem as a lack of nurturing or ‘tough love’.
Results in black boys finding it hard to overcome the emotional and behavioural difficulties of adolescence. Street-gangs of other fatherless boys offer black boys ‘perverse loyalty and love’.
These present boys with a media inspired role model of anti-school black masculinity.
Arnot (2004)
Describes the ‘ultra-tough ghetto superstar, an image constantly reinforced through rap lyrics and MTV videos.
Sewell - Peer group pressure
Black boys subject to powerful anti-educational peer group pressure - boys interviewed argued the greatest barrier to success was pressure from other boys.
Speaking in standard English and achieving in school were often viewed with hostility by their peers and seen as ‘selling out’ to the white establishment.
Argues black students do worse than their Asian peers one group is nurtured by MTV, and the other is clocking up on educational hours.
What does Sewell conclude?
Black children need to have greater expectations placed on them to raise their aspirations.
Gilbourn (2008)
Argues it is not peer pressure but institutional racism within the education system that systemically produces the failure of large numbers of black boys.
Pryce (1979)
Saw family structures as contributing to the under-achievement of black Caribbean pupils, arguing West Indian life is more turbulent and lacking in support.
Claims Asian’s are higher achievers because their culture is more resistant to racism , whereas black pupils have lower self-esteem and underachieve.
Lawrence (1982)
Challenges Pryce, argues black pupils fail because of racism in and outside of schools.
Strand (2010)
Found many black pupils fall behind after starting school.
If a group can begin their compulsory schooling as the highest achievers and yet finish as the lowest achievers it challenges the assumption made by theorists focusing on external factors such as Cultural Deprivation Theory, that black children enter school unprepared.
Driver and Ballard (1981)
Argue Asian family structures bring educational beliefs as they are more positive and supportive towards education and have higher aspirations for their children’s future.
Mason (2000)
‘Discrimination is a continuing and persistent feature of the experience of Britain’s citizens of minority ethnic origin’.
Helps to explain why members of ethnic minorities are more likely to face unemployment and low pay, this in turn has a negative effect on their children’s educational prospects.
Ethnic differences - External factors:
Racism in wider society
Greater poverty and material deprivation experienced by ethnic minorities is the product of racism in wider society.
These problems combined have a negative effect on the educational prospects of children from ethnic minorities.
Gilborn and Mirza (2000)
Argue that even when comparisons are made between pupils of the same social class but different ethnic minorities, differences in achievement can be found. For example, even MC black pupils do comparatively poorly at GCSE in comparison to white MC pupils.
Palmer (2012)
Found that almost half of all ethnic minority children live in low-income households, compared to a quarter of white children. Ethnic minorities are twice as likely to be unemployed.
15% of ethnic minority households live in overcrowded
live in overcrowded conditions compared with only 2% of white households.
Flaherty (2004)
Found Pakistanis and Bangladeshis are over 3 times more likely that white people to be in the poorest 5th of the population. Pakistanis are nearly twice as likely to be in unskilled, semi-skilled jobs, or shift work.
Ethnic differences - External factors:
Material deprivation
Ethnic minorities are more likely to suffer from material deprivation.
Reasons: unemployment, low pay, and overcrowding.
Many live in economically depressed areas with high levels of unemployment.
Cultural factors like purdah in some Muslim households which prevent women from working.
A lack of language skills, foreign qualifications not being recognised.
Swann report (1985)
Concluded if class positions of ethnic minorities isn’t taken into account there is a danger that the effects of cultural deprivation may be over-estimated and effects of material deprivation and poverty under-estimated.
Pilkington (1997)
Argues that cultural explanations should be treated with caution as they often generalise and divert attention away from material inequalities and the possible failings of the education system itself.
Khan (1976)
Sees Asian families as ‘stress ridden’ bound by tradition.
Controlling attitude towards children, particularly girls.
