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. They did a field experiment, giving teachers false information about the students and their IQ scores. They found that the students performed in line with the false information that the teachers had, regardless to the actual IQ scores. This showed that the teachers focus more on the 'higher IQ' students to make them achieve even higher rather than helping the 'lower IQ' students to help them improve. This is a limitation of their study because the 'lower IQ' students are getting ignored/not the main focus to the teacher so these students will not improve as much.
Research shows that teachers are more likely to label middle class children as 'bright and well behaved' but working class children as 'naughty and disruptive'. Following the label being attached on the child is self fulfilling prophecy, this is when the child will respond and act according to the label being placed on them, so a middle class student will act well behaved and complete the work that is set whereas the working class student will disrupt and not complete the work set and therefore not do well in exams. This shows that labeling working and middle class students affects the educational achievements because of their social class.However George H. Mead can be criticised by material/cultural deprivation. Material deprivation is when the child doesn't have the right equipment for school e.g. books, and cultural deprivation is when the children
The educational maintenance allowance gave payments to students from low-income backgrounds to encourage them to stay in education after 16 to gain better qualifications. This was because after completing their GCSEs working class pupils went straight to work as they were unable to afford their parents rent, bills etc. Bonuses were given to those who achieved good results however, this was means tested and so, the amount of money children had received was hugely dependant on
Howard Becker studied the way teachers judged pupils according to how close they were to being the ‘ideal pupil’. He found that middle class children were closest to the ideal pupil image where as working class students were furthest away due to unruly behaviour. Labelling causes social class differences as teachers label the middle class as more able and ready to learn so they tend to receive more attention than the working class. For the working class, it means that they never get the chance to prove themselves and work towards coming out of the working class bracket - even if they are willing and capable. They are then ignored, remain behind and the negative stereotypes of working class children being less able and unruly continues.
Many people may argue to this statement, but we are here to show that there are studies that show it, the students know that you have to have good grades to be in sports/extracurricular activities. Having good grades can lessen stress about affording college and give you opportunities for scholarships. Most colleges and coaches would rather have student with good grades becauses it shows that you are a more committed student and harder worker. Do you want to be that athletic that never cared about their grades only sports? Your grades prove you are able to equally balance academics and athletics, just like a balanced teeter totter.
This deliberate use of Adderall to gain better grades puts ADHD students at a further disadvantage because there is no other means by which the field could be leveled once more. This therefore qualifies as treating an ADHD student as a mere means. This can be said because the non-ADHD student is negatively affecting the end of another
Orwell claims that the only reason he was allowed at his school as a poor, lower class child was so that he could win a scholarship to an even better school. While this would make his school look good, it would also help him be successful in life even more. A child would not look at the long term consequences of this and could very easily see it as they were just trying to use him to make the school look better. Every school has social classes; it is not unique to just Orwell’s school. Snobbery is a part of everyday life and every adult knows this and has dealt with it.
The third reason is they’ll have better behavior. Sometimes it’s very hard for kids to get focused on school ,and cash incentives would be great stimulator. This is the first reason why kids should get paid for the good grades. Kids will have a choice between spending time by TV or computer and spending time to prepare homework . If their priority is make some money, in this case with getting good grades, they will be more focused to complete homework neatly and correctly.
Children who have well educated parents listen to complex language with larger vocabularies and are read to more often. They then attend school more ready to learn. Students from less literate homes will learn more from better teachers than from worse teachers. But will they will not achieve, on average, as much as children from more literate homes. The effects of the achievement gap are that individual students do not get the education they deserve.
Many argue that the funding of sports teams in educational institutions should be cut. Some parents, educators and students believe that these expenses are too costly and distracting from the fundamental core subjects, such as English, math, history and science. This one-sided perspective actually sidetracks these advocates from the fact that school sports teams benefit students in numerous aspects. The funding placed into sports teams in educational institutions influence students by teaching teamwork, reducing the chances of obesity, and enhancing academic behavior. Being on a sports team teaches teamwork.