In turn, black pupils felt teachers underestimated their ability and picked on them. Gilborn and Youdell conclude that much of the conflict between white teachers and black pupils stem from the racial stereotypes that teachers hold, rather than the pupil’s actual behaviour. This disadvantages pupils because they are treated differently, which could result in their failure and even exclusion from school. As Jenny Bourne 1994) found that schools tend to see black boys as a threat and label them
Fundamentally, one factor which contributes to the ethnic differences within the school place is due to the labeling theory. This is when a particular definition is attached to a student such as ‘smart’ or ‘stupid’ this often leads to a self-fulfilling prophecy as the student begins to believe the label they have been branded as and therefore begins to act upon it. Some sociologists have focused on how black pupils are labeled negatively which has a direct impact on their education. Gillborn & Youdell (2000) found that black pupils were more likely to receive discipline from their teacher although fellow classmates may have been acting in a similar way. This leads to further problems as conflict begins to emerge between teachers and pupils as black pupils are seen as anti-authority due to the misinterpretation of behaviour black boys especially, are labelled negatively leading exclusions which affect their educational attainment as missing lessons means that their knowledge is being limited.
To label someone is to attach a meaning or a definition to them. This is studied by Interactionists. When looking at ethnic differences in achievement, studies show that teacher often see black and Asian pupils as being far from the ‘ideal’ pupil. These negative labels leads to ethnic minority pupils being treated differently, resulting in their low educational performance. Gillborn and Youdell (2000) found that teachers expected black pupils to present more discipline problems and misinterpreted their behaviour as threatening or as a challenge to authority.
For example, Wright (1992) found that teachers perceived and treated minority ethnic pupils differently from white pupils. Afro-Caribbean boys were often expected to behave badly and they received a disproportionate amount of negative teacher attention. Other sociologists claim that non-school factors such as family structure and home background have a greater impact on the educational achievement of different ethnic groups. Assess the claim that ‘ethnic differences in educational achievement are primarily the result of school factors’ (20 marks) Patterns of ethnic achievement are complex, cross-cut by gender and social class. For example Black, Pakistani and Bangladeshi students do worst compared to Indians and Chinese who do best.
However, he also found that some teachers labelled all Black boys as rebels, regardless of the facts. Using material from Item B and elsewhere, assess the strengths and limitations of one of the following methods for the study of educational achievement among ethnic-minority pupils: (b) Official statistics (20 marks) Positivist sociologists would argue that by using secondary data in the form of official statistics, researchers are able to maintain an objective position in the process thus enabling them to avoid the dangers of interviewer bias and the possibility of data being misinterpreted. Item B suggests ‘there is considerable evidence to show that some pupils from ethnic minority backgrounds fall behind in school, particularly during the secondary phase’. The Item implies the availability of statistics providing evidence of achievement levels of ethnic-minority pupils. For example schools now have to provide data on SATs, G.C.S.E.
Assess sociological explanations for ethnic differences in achievement. (20 Marks) There are many reasons for ethnic differences in achievement, it’s been found that Indian and Asian pupils achieve higher than White, African-Caribbean, and Black, Pakistani and Bangladeshi pupils. One possible cause of ethnic differences in education is labeling, sociologist Gillborn found that teachers would label and therefore discipline black pupils quicker than other pupils which would do the same things and this would create a self fulfilling prophecy of the teachers thinking that black pupils would misbehave and do poorly and the pupils would accept that and with the extra lack of teacher help and increased discipline would therefore fail. Gillborn and Youdell think that this is because teachers label black pupils as being more likely to cause problems and rebel, with the teachers labeling the black pupils like this it makes them feel picked on and that the teachers underestimated them. Another result of the negative labeling of black pupils is the higher exclusion rate and the higher chances of black pupils to be put in sets below their actual abilities, which can only lead those black pupils to underachieve.
On the other hand, Gilbon recognises the processes committed in school which create the ethnic differences in attainment, he found that Afro-Caribbean boys were often labelled “unruly” “disrespectful”, they were also more likely to be given detentions than other pupils. This was because teachers misinterpreted their dress and manner of speech as a challenge to their authority. These actions lead these boys to have a self fulfilling prophecy which results in them
With the appreciation of diversity and the embrace of multiculturalism, attitudes will change because the school system will realize that too long have they marginalized the abilities of minorities and children of different cultures. When teachers in the school system have learned to stop the prejudice and give all children a fair share then it will break the child’s mind set that they do not measure up to their peers and will prove that each child given an opportunity can equally
If a W.C student is labelled by a middle-class (M.C) teacher the student often believe that the teacher is right therefore they take that label they have been given and they become a self-fulfilling prophecy which means they accept the label they have been given and stay that standard, this is basically saying if a student is labelled negatively they stay negative because they are ‘fulfilling their own prophecy’ so they are now going to underachieve in education. This is effected by poverty due to W.C generally not being able to afford nice uniforms so the teacher can tell they come from a W.C background because they don’t look as smart as the M.C students. Another reason in the claim that poverty is the main reason for W.C underachievement is because they are generally more fatalistic. If a W.C child is fatalistic in school then it means that they are also culturally deprived, because they are culturally deprived they have attitudes which insist that they are not going to do well in school because for example their parents didn’t then they will not try to get an education as they are fatalistic about being setup to fail in
Aaron Cicourel and John Kitsuse’s study of educational counsellors in an American High school shows how labelling can disadvantage working-class students and it states in item A that ‘they were negatively labelled as non-academic and often as ‘difficult’’. This is because counsellors play an important role in deciding which students will get onto courses that prepare them for higher education. They found from their study that although they claimed to judge them on their ability, in practice they mainly judged them on the basis of their social class and/or race. Even where students had similar grades, counsellors were more likely to label middle-class