internal

Internal factors:

• labelling

• Setting + streaming

• Subcultures

Setting + streaming:

• Ball

• Gillborn + Youdell

Ball:

• Conducted his research at beach side comprehensive school.

• Participant observer, examining the internal organisation of the school.

• Band 1: academic potential, further education, smart.

• Band 2: uninterested in school, difficult to control, immature, lazy and poorly behaved.

• Band 3: unfortunate, low ability, ant-school, emotionally unstable and a waste of teachers’ time.

• Mainly affected w class pupils who end up in Band 2 and 3.

• Students began school with the same attitudes then shifted based on the Bands they were assigned to.

• Ball argued this does not happen in mixed-ability groups regardless of their performance.

Gillborn +Youdell

• educational triage explains how students were labelled.

• High filers - top set/will pass anyway don’t need much input from teachers.

• C/D borderline - middle set targeted for extra help.

• No hopers - bottom set, hopeless and ignored by teachers due to being a ‘waste of time’.

• Argued this stratification due to the pressure on schools to maintain their position on league tables

Labelling:

• Becker

• Rist

• Rosenthal + Jacobson

Becker:

• interviewed high school teachers.

• students judged based on how closely fit image of ‘ideal’ student: clothes, speech and material factors.

• M class fit standard so labelled positively leading to success whilst w class labelled negatively leading to a master status and a self fulfilling prophecy of failure.

Rist:

• Found teachers used child’s background to put them into sets.

• tigers: fast learners, m class, closer to the teacher and praised for their work.

• cardinals: sat further back in class, w class, middle ability students.

• clowns: misbehaving, w class, labelled less likely to achieve due to not wanting to and not being able to learn.

Rosenthal and Jacobson:

• Pygamalion effect - teachers’s high expectations/positive reinforcements lead to improved performance in students.

• Field experiment: told teachers some students were late bloomers to see if expectations affected their performance.

• Factors that affected students who were ‘late bloomers’: response opportunity + feedback

Subcutures

• Willis

• Young

Willis

• 12 working class boys in one school and identified 2 groups.

• Lads - anti school students who enjoyed ‘avin a laff’ and had a negative habitus (ways of thinking about society + education)

• earoles - pro-school students who had a positive habitus)

Young:

• NEDs (non-educated delinquents) associated with anti-social behaviour, alcohol/ drugs and lack of interest in education.

• Interviewed young people on: socio-economic + family backgrounds, educational engagement, peer status and truancy + delinquency.

• Found labels used as derogatory were being reclaimed with pride.

• some willingly identified as NEDs/Chavs.

• More girls considered themselves part of the group than guys.

• Some considered themselves NEDs but were from affluent/m-class backgrounds.

• Found appeal of the group was gaining better social standing amongst peers - NEDs respected by youth for being ‘cool’ risk-takers + rule-breakers.