Ethnicity

Statistics on ethnicity & educational achievement

• Statistics show that students from some minority ethnic groups (such as Chinese and Indian) achieve better results in public examinations than others (such as Black Caribbean and Pakistani)

• The 2024 Education Policy Institute report:

  • Most ethnic groups now outperform white British pupils at GCSE

  • All ethnic groups (except white and Black Caribbean and white Irish) made greater progress from 2019 to 2023 than white British pupils

  • Chinese pupils are the highest achievers:

    • 27 months ahead of white British pupils

    • 8 months ahead of Indian pupils (the next highest group)

    • Nearly 5 years ahead of Gypsy Roma pupils (lowest attaining group)

  • Ethnic attainment gaps have narrowed slightly since 2019

• Sociologists explain ethnic differences in educational achievement as a result of:

  • factors within schools and the education system (internal factors)

    • E.g., interactions between pupils and teachers, pupil subcultures and institutional racism

  • factors outside the education system (external factors)

    • E.g., cultural deprivation, material deprivation, racism in wider society, and family structure

Cultural deprivation

Cultural deprivation theorists argue that some ethnic minority pupils underachieve because their home life does not equip them with the same skills and attitudes as the white middle class

Cultural deprivation - intellectual and linguistic skills

• Some theorists claim children from low-income Black families lack stimulation and enriching experiences

• This may result in poor reasoning and problem-solving skills

• The language spoken by low-income black families is inadequate for educational success

• However, critics argue that many ethnic minority pupils are multilingual, which can be an intellectual advantage

Cultural deprivation - attitudes and values

• Some ethnic minorities are socialised into a fatalistic "live for today" attitude, lacking the motivation to succeed in education

• Contrastingly, Asian, Chinese and African families often instil high educational aspirations, viewing education as a route to upward social mobility

Cultural deprivation - family structure and parental support

• Charles Murray (1984): Argued that young males in the African-Caribbean families underachieve because of a lack of positive adult role models and discipline

• Tony Sewell (2009): Argues it’s not the absence of fathers but a lack of "tough love" and the pull of gangs that impacts Black boys

• Ruth Lupton (2004): Found that adult authority was respected in Asian households, which aligns well with school expectations

• Archer and Francis (2005): Argue that Chinese parents see education as a 'family project' and invest time and money in their education

strength of cultural deprivation

• Research support for some cultural influences

  • Driver and Ballard (1981) and Ruth Lupton (2004) show how strong parental support and positive attitudes towards education can help overcome socioeconomic disadvantage

    • This is evident in some Asian families

weaknesses of cultural deprivation - blames the victim

• Blames the victim

  • Keddie argues that cultural deprivation theory wrongly assumes that minority ethnic children fail in education because they lack the 'right' values or language skills

  • In reality, these pupils are culturally different, not deprived

    • Failure is a result of schools being ethnocentric, privileging white, middle-class norms

weaknesses of cultural deprivation - ignores racism and structural inequality

• Ignores racism and structural inequality

  • The theory overlooks institutional racism in schools and wider society, which can negatively affect teacher expectations and curriculum content

  • Gillborn (1997) argues that marketisation allows negative stereotypes to influence school admissions, meaning that ethnic minority children are more likely to end up in unpopular schools

weaknesses of cultural deprivation - oversimplifies and stereotypes

• Oversimplifies and stereotypes

  • Cultural deprivation theory treats ethnic groups as the same, ignoring important variations within groups

  • It does not explain why girls in most ethnic groups outperform boys or why Indian and Chinese pupils succeed despite sharing some of the same economic disadvantages

  • Evans (2006) argues that white working-class boys also underachieve, not due to a lack of culture, but because of a “white working-class street culture” shaped by poverty and limited opportunity

weaknesses of cultural deprivation - overstates the impact of language

• Overstates the impact of language

  • Recent evidence shows language differences are not a major barrier

  • In 2010, pupils with English as an additional language achieved nearly the same GCSE results as native speakers (Gillborn and Mirza, 2000)

  • This challenges the assumption that speaking a different language at home leads to poor academic outcomes

weaknesses of cultural deprivation - educational solutions to cultural bias

• Educational solutions to cultural bias

  • Critics argue for multicultural education, which incorporates and values the cultures of minority students into the curriculum

    Others call for anti-racist education, which aims to challenge institutional bias and discrimination in schools

material deprivation

• Material deprivation refers to a lack of physical or financial resources needed to live a basic, stable life

• It describes how poverty and lack of material resources can negatively affect a person’s opportunities and outcomes

• Ethnic minority groups are more likely to experience poverty, which can negatively affect educational outcomes

• Ethnic minorities often face poor housing, overcrowding, and low income, reducing access to educational resources like books and computers

• Material deprivation combined with children's experience of racism undermines their educational performance

research studies - Guy Palmer

• Guy Palmer (2012) found:

  • Almost 50% of ethnic minority children live in low-income households (compared to 25% of white children)

  • Ethnic minorities are twice as likely to be unemployed or work low-paid jobs

research studies - the equality and human rights commission

• The Equality and Human Rights Commission (2010) found:

  • White British, Bangladeshi, and African-Caribbean boys who have free school meals (FSM) are twice as likely to be permanently excluded from school

research studies - ireson and rushforth

• Ireson and Rushforth (2005) found:

  • Ethnic minority parents from higher socioeconomic backgrounds can afford to hire private tutors for their children

strengths of maternal deprivation - supported by statistics

• Supported by statistics

  • Stokes et al. (2015) found that educational gaps between ethnic groups have narrowed over the past two decades

  • However, students from low-income, white British backgrounds now perform worse than many minority groups from similarly disadvantaged circumstances

strengths of maternal deprivation - class may be more significant then ethnicity

• Class may be more significant than ethnicity

  • Modood (2004) argues that while low income affects all ethnic groups, the impact is less severe for Indian and Chinese students than for white British students

  • This suggests that material deprivation intersects with other cultural factors

weaknesses of maternal deprivation - underestimates the role of racism

• Underestimates the role of racism

  • Gillborn (2015) challenges the view that only minority groups suffer inequality

  • He shows that white children in poverty can also experience serious disadvantage, but that racism still shapes the overall experience of minority groups in school

weaknesses of maternal deprivation - fails to explain high performances in poor groups

• Fails to explain high performance in poor groups

  • Chinese and Indian pupils, despite being materially deprived, often outperform white pupils

  • E.g., in 2011, 86% of Chinese girls on free school meals achieved five or more high-grade GCSEs, compared to just 65% of white girls not on free school meals, suggesting other factors are at play

weaknesses of maternal deprivation - doesn’t account for diversity within groups

• Does not account for diversity within groups

  • Ethnic groups are not the same; important variations within groups are overlooked

  • For instance, while Indian pupils tend to perform well, this masks variation based on region, language, and class background

  • Using broad ethnic categories may oversimplify complex realities

weaknesses of maternal deprivation - fails to explain recent patterns

• Fails to explain recent patterns

  • Recent data (e.g., EPI 2024) shows that many ethnic groups now outperform white British pupils at GCSE, challenging the assumption that cultural or material deprivation fully explains underachievement

weaknesses of maternal deprivation - underestimates racism and institutional factors

• Underestimates racism and institutional factors

  • These theories focus heavily on home background and overlook internal school factors

  • E.g., institutional racism, teacher labelling, and curriculum bias may systematically disadvantage some ethnic groups within schools

racism in wider society

• Sociologists argue that systemic racism affects opportunities for ethnic minorities in employment, housing, and education

  • Systemic racism (also known as institutional racism) refers to how racism is embedded into the laws, policies, practices, and structures of a society, resulting in ongoing disadvantages for certain racial or ethnic groups

• David Mason (2000) argues that racial discrimination continues to disadvantage minorities

• Rex (1986) found that racism leads to social exclusion and worsens material deprivation, e.g., poorer housing and job prospects

• These inequalities filter into schools, reinforcing negative teacher expectations and reducing the motivation and achievement of ethnic minority pupils

teacher labelling and racism

• Sociologists argue that internal or school-based factors help explain why some ethnic groups underachieve in comparison to others

• One of these factors includes teacher labelling

• Interactionists claim that teachers often label students based on racial stereotypes, e.g.,

  • Black pupils (particularly boys) are labelled as disruptive or threatening (Gillborn & Youdell, 2000)

    • Black boys were often dismissed as 'no-hope' students and were more likely to be given detentions

    • Black boys were placed in lower sets, even when their behaviour was similar to white students

    • Black girls were labelled as potentially disruptive but good at sport

  • Teacher labelling of Asian pupils is more mixed than black students (Wright, 1992)

    • Asian girls may be seen as passive or too compliant, whereas Asian boys are seen as immature

    • Wright (1992) found that Asian students felt they weren't allowed to participate fully in class discussions

    • Gillborn (2008) argued that Chinese and Indian students are labelled as 'ideal students' because of their positive attitudes towards school

• These labels shape teacher expectations and interactions, which can impact achievement through a self-fulfilling prophecy

pupil subcultures and responses - fuller

• Fuller (1984) found Black girls in London rejected negative labels by working hard and achieving academically, without conforming to school rules

  • This shows that a label doesn't inevitably produce a self-fulfilling prophecy

pupil subcultures and responses - mirza

• Mirza (1992) identified ambitious black girls who avoided racist teachers but were selective in their classroom participation

  • This strategy was unsuccessful as it limited their progress

pupil subcultures and responses - sewell

• Sewell (1998) identified a variety of black boys' responses, such as:

  • rebels: reject school values

  • conformists: keen to succeed and avoid stereotypes

  • innovators: pro-education but anti-school

  • retreatists: reject the values of school and black subcultures

• Sewell found that only a small minority of black boys identified as 'rebels', yet teachers tend to see all black boys in this way, and this contributes to their academic underachievement

pupil identities and idel pupils

• Archer (2008) found that teachers construct three types of pupil identities:

  • Ideal pupil: white, middle-class, masculine, achieving through natural ability and initiative

  • Pathologised pupil: Asian, feminine, conformist, achieving through hard work, not ‘natural ability’

  • Demonised pupil: black or white working-class, hyper-sexualised identity, seen as aggressive and unintelligent

• Archer claims that ethnic minority pupils are likely to be seen as either demonised or pathologised pupils

• Stereotypes can affect how pupils are perceived, treated and assessed

strengths of teacher labelling and pupil subcultures - reveals how schools are not neutral institutions

• Reveals how schools are not neutral institutions

  • Labelling theory is useful in showing how teacher expectations, often based on social class, ethnicity or perceived ability, can shape pupil identity and influence achievement

  • It challenges the cultural deprivation view that blames working-class underachievement on the home

strengths of teacher labelling and pupil subcultures - backed by valid qualitative data

• Backed by valid qualitative data

  • Much of the research is based on classroom observation and interviews, which allows interactionists to explore meanings and behaviour in depth

  • This approach gives insights into how labels are applied and internalised

weaknesses of teacher labelling and pupil subcultures - too determinstic

• Too deterministic

  • Labelling theory has been criticised for assuming that once a pupil is labelled, they will inevitably live up to that label (a self-fulfilling prophecy)

  • However, not all students internalise labels, and some resist them; e.g., Mirza found that black girls often rejected negative labels and strived for success despite racism

weaknesses of teacher labelling and pupil subcultures - overlooks wider structures of power

• Overlooks wider structures of power

  • Marxists argue that labelling theory fails to explain why teachers label some groups negatively in the first place

  • It ignores the influence of the wider capitalist system and how schools function to reproduce class inequality

weaknesses of teacher labelling and pupil subcultures - observation may influance behaviour

• Observation may influence behaviour

  • Critics argue that observing teachers and students may lead to artificial rather than natural behaviour, reducing the validity of the findings

weaknesses of teacher labelling and pupil subcultures - alternative explanations for underachievement

• Alternative explanations for underachievement

  • Sewell (1997) argues that labelling is only one part of the picture

  • He suggests that external factors—such as the absence of fathers, peer pressure, and street culture—play a bigger role in black boys’ underachievement

weaknesses of teacher labelling and pupil subcultures - racism may not be as widespread

• Racism may not be as widespread

  • Some critics challenge the assumption that racism is widespread among teachers

  • Professional ethics, legal consequences, and peer disapproval act as deterrents against overt racist behaviour

institutional racism

• Another internal factor that might be responsible for black pupils' underachievement in schools is institutional racism

• Institutional racism is the hidden, unconscious and unintended discrimination embedded in:

  • admissions policies

  • the marketing of the school

  • the curriculum and staffing

• Institutional racism lowers the self-esteem of ethnic minority students and undermines their academic performance

• Critical race theory views racism as a deep-rooted feature of the education system itself, which is self-perpetuating

marketisation

• Gillborn (1997) argues that schools use selection methods that disadvantage Black pupils as negative stereotypes influence school admissions

• Tikly (2006) found that teacher decisions to enter students for either Higher or Foundation tier GCSEs resulted in ethnic inequalities in achievement

• Gillborn (2008) found that schools use old-fashioned ability measures to determine streams or ‘Gifted and Talented’ access, often benefiting white pupils

• Racialised expectations lead to inequality in discipline, access to opportunities, and teacher assessments

staffing

• There is a lack of positive ethnic minority teachers as role models in schools

  • 17% of students in the UK are from ethnic minority backgrounds, whereas only 7% of teachers are

• Sewell (1997) sees this as the main in-school cause of the underachievement of black boys

• Ranson (2005) claims that school governing bodies are disproportionately white, middle-aged and middle-class

the ethnocentric curriculum

• Coard (2005) argues that the school curriculum tends to reflect white British culture

  • Literature, music, and history focus on white European narratives

  • Languages and religious studies often exclude minority cultures

• Ball (1994) argues that the National Curriculum ignores ethnic diversity

  • This may lead to feelings of exclusion among ethnic minority students

• Tikly (2006) found that black students were aware of their invisibility in the curriculum and were frustrated by the focus on white people and Europe

strength of institutional racism.- explains patterns of underachievement

• Explains patterns of underachievement

  • The concept of institutional racism provides a framework for understanding the persistent underachievement of some minority groups

  • E.g., black Caribbean boys, even when class is controlled for

weaknesses of institutional racism.- overstates the role of racism

• Overstates the role of racism

  • Sewell (1997) argues that although racism hasn't disappeared from schools, it is not powerful enough to prevent individuals from succeeding

  • He believes we must focus more on external factors such as peer group pressure, street culture, and the absence of father figures

weaknesses of institutional racism.- model minorities challenge the claim

• Model minorities challenge the claim

  • Indian and Chinese students often outperform white British pupils

  • This challenges the idea that schools are uniformly racist against all minorities

weaknesses of institutional racism.- gender may be a more important factor

• Gender may be a more important factor

  • Girls tend to outperform boys across all ethnic groups

  • This suggests gender may intersect with ethnicity in more complex ways than institutional racism alone can explain

weaknesses of institutional racism.- class still matters

• Class still matters

  • Pupils entitled to free school meals (FSM), regardless of ethnicity, are less likely to succeed

  • This suggests that social class, material deprivation, and poverty may play a greater role in educational achievement than racism alone