labelling/ subcultures Flashcards
Dunne and Gazeley (2008)
- 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
Rist 1970- kindergarten
- 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)
Rosenthal and Jacobsen (1965) + impact on students achievement
- 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
labelling
to attatch as meaning or definition to a pupil such as ‘bright’ or ‘troublemaker’
self fulfilling prophecy
living up to the label attached to oneself
halo effect
effect created by accepting the (positive) label
ideal pupil
an image held by teachers of the kind of pupils they like to teach
master status
defined by the label attached (usually bad)
micro theory
study of society on a small scale (for example looking at a small sample to find out what they really think/do)
Becker (1971)
- 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
Lacey: polarisation and differentiation
- 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.
Gilbourn and Youdell argue that streaming happens due to the A-C economy
what is the A-C economy?
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)
Jo Boaler- effects on seperating students by ability
- 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.
Ingram (2009)- m/c values of the education system
- 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.
Evans (2009)- w/c girls’ view of uni
- 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
