Pupil Responses and Subcultures

Pupil responses to labelling

AO1:

Pupils react differently to teacher racism and negative labelling:

1. Become disruptive or withdrawn.

2. Reject the label and work harder to prove it wrong.

AO2 (Fuller, 1984):

Study of black Year 11 girls in London comprehensive: high achievers in low streams.

Channelled anger at negative labels into academic success.

Did not seek teacher approval; maintained friendships with peers from lower streams.

Conformed only to schoolwork; gave appearance of not caring about school routines.

Relied on own efforts and external exams → maintained positive self-image.

AO3 / Links:

Shows labels do not inevitably lead to failure → no self-fulfilling prophecy.

Links to interactionist theory & self-fulfilling prophecy: agency matters.

Mac an Ghaill (1992)

AO1 / AO2:

Studied black and Asian ‘A’-level students in sixth form.

Negative labels from teachers did not determine achievement.

Responses influenced by ethnic group, gender, prior schooling.

Example: girls from all-girls schools had greater academic commitment → overcame labels.

AO3 / Links:

Confirms Fuller: resistance to negative labelling is possible.

Highlights role of prior experiences and context in shaping responses.

Mirza (1992): failed strategies to avoid racism

AO1:

Ambitious black girls faced teacher racism, discouragement from careers/professional aspirations.

Three types of teacher racism:

1. Colour-blind: claim all pupils equal but ignore racism.

2. Liberal chauvinists: believe black pupils culturally deprived → low expectations.

3. Overt racists: actively believe blacks are inferior → discriminate.

AO2:

Strategies to cope: selective help-seeking, working independently, avoiding teachers/options.

Despite high self-esteem, strategies limited opportunities → unsuccessful in achieving full potential.

AO3 / Links:

Shows resistance may still be constrained by structural barriers.

Links to institutional racism in schools → ethnic differences in achievement.

Sewell (2009): black boys’ subcultural responses

AO1:

Focused on peer group and street culture alongside teacher stereotyping.

Identified four responses:

1. Rebels: anti-school, anti-authority, hyper-masculine, often excluded.

2. Conformists: largest group, pro-school, friends across ethnic groups, avoid stereotypes.

3. Retreatists: isolated, disconnected from school and subcultures, despised by rebels.

4. Innovators: pro-education but anti-school; value success without seeking teacher approval (like Fuller’s girls).

AO2:

Rebels = minority, but stereotype affects all black boys.

Many negative attitudes = response to racism & stereotyping.

AO3 / Links:

Shows teacher stereotypes + peer culture influence achievement.

Supports interactionist perspective + self-fulfilling prophecy, but highlights external factors (peer pressure, street culture, lack of nurturing father) as significant.

Links to cultural explanations, labelling, and subcultural theory.

Evaluation: Labelling & Pupil Responses

AO1:

Labelling theory focuses on how teachers’ stereotypes can disadvantage pupils and contribute to underachievement.

Contrasts with cultural deprivation theory, which blames the child’s home/family background.

AO2 / Examples:

Gillborn & Youdell: publishing league tables → ‘A-to-C economy’ → black and working-class pupils placed in lower streams or lower-tier exams.

Mirza: pupils’ strategies to avoid racism (selective help-seeking, independent work) may protect self-esteem but can limit opportunities.

AO3 / Evaluation:

Strength: highlights the internal, systemic factors in education, rather than blaming families.

Weakness: danger of over-simplifying labelling as individual teacher prejudice, ignoring institutional racism.

Weakness: danger of assuming automatic self-fulfilling prophecy → research shows pupils can resist labels (Fuller, Mac an Ghaill, Sewell innovators).

Shows that pupil agency matters, but structural constraints (teacher racism, league tables) still affect outcomes.