Education: Ethnicity AO3 Flashcards
(14 cards)
Evaluation of language skills as an external factor for ethnic differences in achievement
-Overstated: Many ethnic minority pupils (e.g. Indian and Chinese) outperform white peers despite English not being their first language.
-Gillborn & Mirza (2000): By age 16, language differences have little impact.
-Focus on language ignores structural inequalities like racism or poverty.
Evaluation of parental attitudes and support as an external factor for ethnic differences in achievement
-Overgeneralises: Assumes all Asian families are supportive and all Black/White working-class families are not.
-Ignores socioeconomic context that may restrict parental involvement.
-Cultural explanations can drift into victim blaming.
Evaluation of Family structure as an external factor for ethnic differences in achievement
-Victim-blaming: Blames underachievement on Black families rather than school structures or racism.
-Driver (1977): Strong female role models in lone-parent Black families can be empowering.
-Focuses on “deficit” rather than acknowledging resilience and agency.
Evaluation of subcultures as an external factor for ethnic differences in achievement
-Sewell over-focuses on African-Caribbean boys and fails to explain high achievement in other minority groups.
-Doesn’t consider racism within schools as a driver of resistance.
-Risk of stereotyping Black boys as anti-school.
Evaluation of racism in wider society as an external factor for ethnic differences in achievement
-Too broad/vague: Doesn’t explain why some ethnic minority groups (e.g. Indian or Chinese pupils) still outperform white British pupils despite experiencing racism.
-Lacks direct school link: Hard to prove a clear causal connection between societal racism and day-to-day school performance.
-Overemphasis on racism: May ignore other intersecting factors like gender, class, and family support.
-Student resilience: Some pupils may respond to racism with greater determination to succeed, rather than underachieving.
Evaluation of material deprivation as an external factor for ethnic differences in achievement
-Not all low-income students underachieve: Some ethnic groups (e.g. Bangladeshi or Chinese) succeed despite poverty.
-Culturally biased: Assumes that deprivation affects all ethnic groups equally — ignores community values, aspirations, or family support.
-Outdated measurements: Free School Meal (FSM) status may not accurately reflect material hardship across different communities.
-Over-focus on class: Ignores the impact of racism or cultural capital on educational experience.
Evaluation of labelling and teacher racism as an internal factor for ethnic differences in achievement
-Not all students accept labels — some resist and still achieve (e.g. Mirza, Mac an Ghaill).
-Labelling theory may be deterministic — underplays student agency.
-Hard to generalise — not all teachers are racist or biased.
Evaluation of pupil subcultures as an internal factor for ethnic differences in achievement
-Based on small case studies — lacks generalisability.
-Doesn’t fully explain why some subcultures succeed despite racism.
-Tends to focus on boys, ignoring girls’ experiences.
Evaluation of the ethnocentric curriculum as an internal factor for ethnic differences in achievement
-Impact may be more symbolic than practical — doesn’t fully explain high achievement of Indian/Chinese pupils.
-Curriculum content may not directly affect exam success.
-Schools may offer multicultural elements that go unacknowledged.
Evaluation of institutional racism as an internal factor for ethnic differences in achievement
-Hard to prove — evidence can be subtle or denied.
-Some argue it overlooks individual success stories and improvements in diversity and inclusion.
-Not all ethnic minority groups are equally disadvantaged.
Evaluation of setting and streaming as an internal factor for ethnic differences in achievement
-Doesn’t explain how some minority students end up in top sets despite bias.
-Schools claim sets are based on ‘ability’, making it difficult to prove racism.
-Focuses on school practices but ignores cultural or economic factors.
Evaluation of under representation in staffing as an internal factor for ethnic differences in achievement
-Impact is more indirect — difficult to measure direct effect on achievement.
-Some students succeed despite lack of role models.
-Diversity in staffing is improving in some schools.
Evaluation of New IQism as an internal factor for ethnic differences in achievement
-Claims of hidden racism can be difficult to evidence.
-Schools may defend data use as neutral and meritocratic.
-Doesn’t explain how some ethnic minority students still succeed.
Evaluation of marketisation and selection as an internal factor for ethnic differences in achievement
-Doesn’t affect all ethnic groups equally — some (e.g. Indian pupils) benefit from school choice.
-Ignores cultural capital and agency of parents who successfully navigate the system.
-Some schools make genuine efforts to reduce bias in admissions.
