Social Class Internal

What are internal factors in explaining class differences in educational achievement?

Internal factors are processes within schools and the education system that contribute to class inequality — including teacher labelling, the self-fulfilling prophecy, streaming, pupil subcultures, and conflicts between pupils' class identities and the school's middle-class culture.

What is labelling and how does it relate to class inequality in education?

To label someone is to attach a meaning or definition to them (e.g. 'bright', 'troublemaker'). Studies show teachers often label pupils not on actual ability but on stereotyped assumptions about their class background — labelling working-class pupils negatively and middle-class pupils positively, regardless of their actual performance.

What did Howard Becker (1971) find about teacher labelling?

Based on interviews with 60 Chicago high school teachers, Becker found they judged pupils according to how closely they matched an image of the 'ideal pupil' — based on work, conduct and appearance. Middle-class children were seen as closest to the ideal; working-class children were seen as furthest away because they were regarded as badly behaved.

What is the 'ideal pupil' concept and how does it vary by school context?

Becker found teachers judge pupils against an image of the 'ideal pupil.' Hempel-Jorgensen (2009) found this varies by school: in a mainly working-class school, the ideal pupil was defined as quiet and obedient (behaviour focus); in a mainly middle-class school, it was defined in terms of personality and academic ability. Working-class pupils rarely match either ideal.

What did Dunne and Gazeley (2008) find about teacher labelling in secondary schools?

From interviews in nine English state secondary schools, they found teachers 'normalised' working-class underachievement — they were unconcerned by it and felt little could be done, but believed they could overcome middle-class underachievement. Teachers set extension work for underachieving middle-class pupils, but entered working-class pupils for easier exams. Teachers also 'overestimated' working-class pupils who performed well.

What did Rist (1970) find about labelling in primary schools?

Rist studied an American kindergarten and found the teacher grouped children into separate tables based on appearance and home background — not ability. Middle-class, neatly dressed children ('tigers') were seated nearest the teacher and received the most encouragement. Working-class children ('cardinals' and 'clowns') were seated further away, given lower-level work and fewer chances to show their ability.

What is the self-fulfilling prophecy and what are its three steps?

A prediction that comes true simply because it was made. Step 1: Teacher labels a pupil (e.g. as unintelligent) and predicts failure. Step 2: Teacher treats the pupil accordingly — giving less attention and expecting less. Step 3: The pupil internalises the label, loses confidence, stops trying, and fails — fulfilling the original prophecy.

What did Rosenthal and Jacobson (1968) find about the self-fulfilling prophecy?

In their 'Oak School' experiment, they told teachers a fake test had identified certain pupils as 'spurters' — in reality these were chosen at random. One year later, 47% of these pupils had made significant progress. The teachers' false beliefs had shaped how they interacted with these pupils — demonstrating how teacher expectations alone can create a self-fulfilling prophecy.

How can the self-fulfilling prophecy cause underachievement as well as overachievement?

If teachers have low expectations of working-class pupils and communicate this through their interactions, these pupils may internalise a negative self-concept — seeing themselves as failures and giving up trying. This fulfils the original (negative) prophecy. Becker shows working-class pupils are rarely seen as 'ideal pupils', making negative self-fulfilling prophecies more likely for them.

What is streaming and how does it reinforce class inequality?

Streaming involves separating pupils into fixed ability groups or classes for all subjects. Teachers are more likely to place working-class pupils in lower streams based on stereotyped assumptions rather than actual ability. Once in a lower stream, pupils are locked into teachers' low expectations — creating a self-fulfilling prophecy of underachievement.

What did Douglas find about streaming and IQ scores?

Douglas found children placed in a lower stream at age 8 had suffered a decline in their IQ score by age 11. By contrast, children placed in a higher stream at age 8 improved their IQ score by age 11 — demonstrating how streaming creates a self-fulfilling prophecy that widens the class gap over time.

What is the 'A-to-C economy' and who identified it?

Identified by Gillborn and Youdell (2001) in a study of two London secondary schools. The publication of league tables creates a system in which schools focus their time, effort and resources on pupils they think can achieve 5 A*-C grades at GCSE — those most likely to boost the school's league table position — at the expense of others.

What is educational triage (Gillborn and Youdell, 2001)?

The process by which schools sort pupils into three categories: (1) those who will pass anyway and can be left alone; (2) borderline C/D pupils given extra help as they can be 'saved'; (3) 'hopeless cases' who are written off and 'warehoused' in bottom sets. Working-class (and Black) pupils are disproportionately labelled as hopeless cases, producing a self-fulfilling prophecy of failure.

What is differentiation (Lacey, 1970)?

Differentiation is the process by which teachers categorise pupils according to their perceived ability, attitude and behaviour. Streaming is a form of differentiation — it gives high status to those placed in high streams (seen as able) and low status to those placed in low streams (seen as less able). Working-class pupils are more likely to receive low-status labels.

What is polarisation (Lacey, 1970)?

Polarisation is the process in which pupils respond to streaming by moving towards one of two opposite extremes — the pro-school or anti-school subculture. In his study of Hightown boys' grammar school, Lacey found that streaming caused boys to polarise: those in high streams formed pro-school subcultures; those in low streams formed anti-school subcultures.

What is an anti-school subculture?

Formed largely by working-class pupils placed in low streams. The school has undermined their self-esteem by placing them in an inferior position. They invert the school's values — gaining status among peers through rule-breaking (truanting, cheekiness, not doing homework). However, joining an anti-school subculture usually becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy of educational failure.

What did Hargreaves (1967) find about streaming and anti-school subcultures?

Hargreaves found that boys in the lower streams of a secondary modern school were 'triple failures' — they had failed their 11+, been placed in low streams, and been labelled as 'worthless louts'. They responded by forming a delinquent subculture, seeking status through defiance, which guaranteed their educational failure.

What did Stephen Ball (1981) find about the abolition of streaming at Beachside Comprehensive?

Ball studied Beachside as it abolished banding (a form of streaming) in favour of mixed-ability groups. He found that when banding was abolished, polarisation into pro- and anti-school subcultures largely disappeared. However, differentiation continued — teachers still labelled middle-class pupils as more cooperative and able, producing better exam results for them through a self-fulfilling prophecy. Class inequalities persisted without streaming.

What are Peter Woods' (1979) four pupil responses to school?

Woods argued pupils can respond to school in multiple ways, not just pro- or anti-school: (1) Ingratiation — being the 'teacher's pet'. (2) Ritualism — going through the motions, staying out of trouble. (3) Retreatism — daydreaming and mucking about. (4) Rebellion — outright rejection of everything the school stands for. Furlong (1984) adds that pupils may shift between responses depending on the teacher.

What are the main criticisms of labelling theory?

Three key criticisms: (1) Determinism — labelling theory assumes labelled pupils have no choice but to fulfil the prophecy. Fuller (1984) shows this is not inevitable — some labelled pupils resist. (2) Marxist criticism — labelling theory blames individual teachers for prejudice but fails to explain why labels are applied; labels stem from a system that reproduces class divisions. (3) It ignores external factors outside school.

What is habitus (Bourdieu) and how does it apply to schools?

Habitus refers to the learned, taken-for-granted dispositions, values, tastes and ways of thinking shared by a social class. Although no habitus is intrinsically better, the middle class has power to define its habitus as superior and impose it on the education system. Schools therefore operate with a middle-class habitus — advantaging middle-class pupils while making working-class pupils feel out of place.

What is symbolic capital in the context of schools?

Schools award 'symbolic capital' — recognition, status and worth — to pupils whose tastes and values align with the school's middle-class habitus. Middle-class pupils gain symbolic capital through their language, appearance and academic ambition. Working-class pupils gain little symbolic capital from school and may seek it elsewhere.

What is symbolic violence (Bourdieu)?

Symbolic violence is when schools devalue the working-class habitus — defining working-class tastes, accents and lifestyles as inferior and worthless without physical force. This makes working-class pupils feel that education is 'not for the likes of us', leading to disengagement, self-exclusion and underachievement.

What did Archer et al (2010) find about working-class pupils' identities and schooling?

Archer found that working-class pupils constructed 'Nike identities' — investing in branded clothing and street styles as an alternative source of symbolic capital and self-worth, since the school withheld symbolic capital from them. These identities conflicted with the school's middle-class habitus, leading to labelling as rebels and making higher education feel 'unrealistic and undesirable' for 'people like us'.

What is 'self-exclusion' and how does it relate to class identity?

Working-class pupils may actively choose to exclude themselves from higher education because it does not fit their habitus or identity. Evans (2009) found working-class girls at a south London comprehensive were reluctant to apply to elite universities, feeling a sense of 'hidden barriers' and not fitting in. Bourdieu argues this comes from habitus — the internalised belief that Oxbridge is 'not for the likes of us'.

What did Ingram (2009) find about working-class boys and the tension between home and school habitus?

Ingram studied working-class Catholic boys in Belfast — one group at grammar school, one at secondary school. Grammar school boys experienced a tension between their working-class neighbourhood habitus and the school's middle-class habitus. Conforming to the school (e.g. wearing the right clothes) risked rejection at home; conforming to the neighbourhood risked symbolic violence at school. Working-class success requires abandoning working-class identity.

What is 'the lads' counter-school culture (Willis, 1977)?

'The lads' formed a distinct counter-culture opposed to the school. They were scornful of conformist 'ear'oles' (pupils who did as they were told). They found school boring and meaningless, flouting its rules by smoking, drinking, disrupting lessons and truanting. They rejected the school's meritocratic ideology as a 'con' — seeing no point in working hard to achieve middle-class jobs.