LABELLING Flashcards
what type of theory is labelling?
Interactionalist Theory
what was Beckers study on labelling?
Interviewed 60 high school teachers
- teachers judge pupils based on how they fit the ‘ideal pupil’
- teachers saw m/c students as ideal due to their appearance and work ethic
- w/c seen as far from ideal, as they were ‘badly behaved’
Hemel-Jorgenson’s view
Teachers notions on what makes the ‘ideal pupil’ varies according to the social class make up of the school
- In a mainly w/c school, the ideal pupil was quiet, passive and obedient - (judged on behaviour not ability)
- In a mainly m/c school, there were few disciple issues and the ideal pupil was defined by personality and academic ability
Dunne and Gazley on Secondary Schools
Suggested the way teachers dealt with underachievement caused class differences in attainment
Teachers dealt with w/c pupils:
- ‘normalised’ pupils underachievement
- felt they had no control of underachievement
- entered them for lower tier exams (underestimating abilities)
- blamed pupils home backgrounds (uninterested parents)
Teachers dealt with m/c students:
- believed pupils could overcome underachievement
- set them extension tasks
Rist on Labelling in Primary Schools
Study on American Kindergarten (5-6 year olds) found:
- teachers used information about home background to separate children into groups
- once in groups, she sat down the students seen as ‘brightest’ = ‘the tigers’ (mostly m/c with clean appearances) and showed them more encouragement
- labelled the other groups as ‘cardinals’ and ‘clowns’ and sat them further away (mostly w/c) and gave them lower level books and fewer chances to show abilities
The Self-Fulfilling Prophecy
Affect of labelling where student becomes their label
- Interactionalists theory
Teacher Expectations - Rosenthal and Jacobson
Studied TE:
- Told teachers to identify bright students in the group (for an IQ Test which teachers did not know about)
- Tested all students and picked 20% out at random and labelled them as the brightest students ahead in achievement
- A year later = had made great achievement progress (had greater effect on younger pupils)
- this is a result on these students being treated better by teachers
Streaming - Douglas
- Those set in a low stream at age 8 had lower IQ scores at age 11
- m/c pupils benefit from streaming due to being placed in higher streams, reflecting them as an ‘ideal pupil’ = resulted in a more positive self-concept, more confidence and worked harder: There IQ improved from ages 8-11
Gillborn and Youdell: A-C Economy
Teachers use stereotypes to put pupils in streams
- More likely to see w/c and black pupils as not having ability = placed in lower streams and placed in lower tier exams
- Schools focus time on those they believe have potential to get a grade C and above and forget the other students
Triage: ‘sorting’
Schools categorise students into three types:
- those who will pass anyway and can be left to get on with it
- Potential = will get help to achieve grade c and higher
- ‘Hopeless cases’ that are going to fail
Pupil Subcultures - Lacey
Identified differentiation and polarisation to explain how pupil subcultures develop:
Differentiation: teachers categorising students according to how they perceive their ability, attitude and behaviour
- Form of differentiation as it separates pupils into the ‘less able’ and ‘more able’
Polarisation: pupils respond to streaming by moving towards one of two opposite ‘poles’/extremes.
- Polarised boys into pro-school subcultures and anti-school subcultures
The Pro-School Subculture
Pupils placed in high streams (m/c) remain committed to school values: gain status in approved way of educational success
Anti-School Subculture
Placed in lower streams (w/c) suffer loss of self-esteem: schools undermining status as inferior
- Labelled as failure = alternative ways of gaining status such as going against school values and gaining status from peers such as being ‘the class clown’
- Creates further issues and leads to SFP and failure in education
Hargreaves
Found similar response to streaming in a secondary modern school
- Boys in lower streams were (from point of ES) Triple Failures
- Failed 11+ and been placed in low streams and labelled as ‘worthless’
- These children banded together to form a delinquent subculture
Abolishing Streaming - Ball
Ball found that in comprehensive schools when they abolished streaming Anti School Subcultures declined
- Differentiation continued
- EDUCATION REFORM ACT 1988 = more streaming
- New opportunities for schools and teachers to differentiate against pupils based on their class
