One way in which relationships and processes within schools can impact upon educational achievement is labelling; in particular, teacher-pupil relationships. Labelling can have a very negative impact on students educational achievement. It suggests that teacher's judge students based on social characteristics such as class, gender, ethnicity rather than their actually ability. The label placed on an individual can have effect on their performance as it leads to self-fulfilling prophecy where they act upon the label. Rosenthal and Jacobson's study showed that young children were effected more by labelling than older students, this is because the younger ones will start to believe the label that they have been given, which then leads to self-fulfilling prophecy, they live up to what they have been labelled as.
Caula Rogers Eng-105 English Composition 1 03/30/2014 Dr. Victoria Smith Impact of ADHD on a Child’s Schooling Children with ADHD generally have trouble in school, only because school causes many trials for children with ADHD. ADHD is not a learning disorder; however it can cause children to have problems with learning. Furthermore, children with ADHD have an excessive rate of learning disorders and will have problems with other school-work like calculation and following a long with his/her teacher during direct instructional time. But with enduring and an efficient plan, the child will be capable of succeeding in the classroom. ADHD negatively can affect a child’s social and emotional behavior and the ability to control them in a positive manner in a school environment.
Bussey came to this conclusion when he found that children imitate same sex models but do not imitate same sex models that are gender inappropriate. Gender roles are also affected by social influences like parents. Parents sometimes have strong opinions on the divides between genders which results in different reinforcements for different behaviours. For example, a mother may react negatively to their daughter playing with masculine toys but positively to their son playing with the same toys. Parental influence has strengths, for example there is a wealth of scientific evidence supporting it.
Toys Emphasis on Gender Roles There are many factors that influence and shape a child’s interpretation of socialization and gender roles. The media they are exposed to, home environment, teachers, peers (Macionis, John J), and even the toys they play with. Toys marketed toward boys tend to encourage masculine characteristics including dominance and strength. While toys marketed toward girls tend to encourage feminine characteristics such as emphasis on appearance and nurturing (Hercules, Kacey). Toys differentiate gender roles, attitudes and activities that a society links to each sex (Macionis, John J), through the difference in types and colors used when marketing to boys or girls.
Another characteristic may be a child showing a preference for playing with and sharing in stereotypical games of the opposite sex. The characteristics once exhibited may be a sign of gender dysmorphic behaviour in children stated by the DSM IV. There are two major explanations for the development of gender dysphoria; the psychological and biological explanation. The psychological explanation states that gender dysmorphia is due to two factors; separation anxiety and parental influence. The first adopts a psychodynamic approach and refers to a child’s anxiety when separated from a primary care giver.
Along with all of this comes sexism and how it plays a role in children’s lives. The child learns from what he or she sees, and sexism is a big thing. For example, a little girl who believes only boys can be doctors and only girls can be nurses. Same with boys, they think they should obviously have the higher degree. Boys are learning at an early age to think that the girls are of lesser value.
There are many differences between the education standards that the classes receive and also along with this, the deprivation that some kids may experience whether they are at home, or at school. The first key reason is cultural factors; Douglas showed that parental interest was the most important factor of the success of the children within education. His research showed that middle class families were most likely to take more of an interest in their children’s education compared to that of a working class parent. This meant that middle class were most likely to visit the school, and encourage their child which meant they would promote their child to stay on past the minimum leaving school age. Douglas measured his experiment by the number of visits a parent would visit the school, however, this may not be a valid assessment as working class parents found it difficult to obtain time off from working long hours to visit the school, not only this but the unease of being in a classroom may explain the lack of visits, not the disinterest.
Sociologists like Cultural deprivation theorists would agree with this statement.They believe that parental interests and attitudes to education influence working class childrens' attainment levels, this can be positive or negative influence.They would argue that children look upon their parents as role models, .When they see their parents act in a negative way regarding rules, school and work, they often follow in their footsteps. This could result in the children developing an Anti-School subculture. Studies do show that the working class do considerably worse than the middle class, in many aspects of education. Children in the middle class are more likely to struggle in school, more likely to underachieve at GCSE level and more likely to be expelled and excluded than middle class students. Cultural deprivation theorists would blame this on the lack of parental guidence and encouragment to succeed in education.
Social agents model the appropriate gender specific behaviours; children observe these behaviours and learn the consequences for behaving inappropriately through vicarious reinforcement. Parents or peers may also directly explain to children what behaviour is deemed appropriate or inappropriate; they are also likely to treat boys and girls differently due to their gender. An example of this is that boys and girls are given different toys to play with. Children are also exposed to peers as they grow up, their social circle may expand which means they may learn from other models. Peers are likely to be brought up in the same way which will reinforce the appropriate behaviour through social interactions.
She knew that women who disguised their sexuality were likely to be promoted more readily than she, yet simultaneously she thought her sexuality was a trump card. Even as she saw how it worked against her, she valued it and sought to preserve it, and tried hard to outshine all young female incumbents. This cannot be a true picture of my mother, though it is as I saw her.” (Working Women Don’t Have Wives) Women executives are everywhere in corporate America, and they may actually be more effective managers then men. In fact, women managers consistently are rated higher than their male counterparts on 37 of 47 critical management qualities such as leadership, social skills, problem-solving and decision-making,