Labelling

How do interactionists explain labelling in education?

Interactionists focus on small-scale, face-to-face interactions, such as those between teachers and pupils in classrooms.

They are interested in:

• how teachers assign labels to pupils

• how pupils respond to these labels

They argue that labelling can influence:

• teacher expectations

• pupil self-identity

• educational outcomes

Thus, achievement is partly shaped through daily classroom interactions.

What did Howard Becker find about the “ideal pupil”?

Howard Becker (1971) found that teachers judge pupils based on how closely they match their image of the “ideal pupil.”

Key criteria:

• work (academic ability)

• conduct (behaviour)

• appearance

Teachers tended to see:

• middle-class pupils as closest to the ideal

• working-class pupils as furthest from it, often viewing them as badly behaved

This shows how class-based stereotypes influence labelling in schools.

How does the “ideal pupil” vary between schools?

Amelia Hempel-Jorgensen (2009) found that definitions of the ideal pupil vary depending on the school’s social class intake.

Examples:

• In working-class Aspen Primary:

  • ideal pupil = quiet, obedient, passive

  • focus on behaviour and discipline

• In middle-class Rowan Primary:

  • ideal pupil = confident, academically able

  • focus on personality and achievement

This shows labelling is shaped by the context of the school

What are teachers’ expectations and why are they important?

Teachers’ expectations refer to the beliefs teachers have about pupils’ abilities and behaviour.

These expectations:

• influence how teachers interact with pupils

• affect opportunities given to pupils

• can shape achievement outcomes

However, they are difficult to study because:

• teachers may hide negative views

• expectations may be unconscious

• they are communicated in subtle ways (e.g., tone, body language, setting)

How does labelling affect working-class achievement in secondary schools?

Máiréad Dunne and Louise Gazeley (2008) found that teachers often:

• “normalise” working-class underachievement

• see it as expected and unchangeable

In contrast:

• middle-class underachievement is taken seriously

• teachers believe it can be improved

This leads to:

• lower expectations for working-class pupils

• less effort to support them

Thus, labelling contributes to class differences in achievement.

How do teachers’ views of home background affect labelling?

Dunne and Gazeley found teachers explain achievement differences using home background.

They often label:

• working-class parents as uninterested in education

• middle-class parents as supportive and involved

Examples of middle-class support:

• attending parents’ evenings

• paying for extra activities (e.g., music lessons)

These assumptions lead teachers to treat pupils differently based on class.

How does labelling influence how teachers treat pupils?

Teachers respond differently depending on labels:

• Middle-class pupils:

  • given extension work

  • encouraged to achieve more

• Working-class pupils:

  • entered for easier exams

  • given less challenging work

Teachers may also:

• underestimate working-class ability

• view successful working-class pupils as “overachieving”

This reinforces educational inequality.

How does labelling itself create class differences in achievement?

Dunne and Gazeley argue that teacher labelling doesn’t just reflect differences—it creates them.

This happens because:

• working-class pupils receive less support and lower expectations

• middle-class pupils receive more encouragement and opportunities

As a result, labelling contributes directly to working-class underachievement.

What did Ray Rist find about labelling in primary schools?

Rist studied a kindergarten and found labelling begins very early in education.

The teacher grouped pupils based on:

• home background

• appearance

Groups included:

• “Tigers” (high ability) – mostly middle-class, neat appearance

• “Cardinals” and “Clowns” – mostly working-class

This shows labelling can occur from the start of schooling.

How did labelling affect pupils in Rist’s study?

• “Tigers”:

  • sat closest to the teacher

  • received more attention and encouragement

  • given more opportunities to succeed

• “Cardinals” and “Clowns”:

  • sat further away

  • given simpler work

  • had fewer chances to demonstrate ability

This limited working-class pupils’ opportunities and contributed to early achievement gaps.

Why is labelling important in explaining internal differences in achievement?

Labelling helps explain how inequality is produced within schools, not just outside them.

Key points:

• Teachers use class-based stereotypes

• These shape expectations and treatment

• This leads to different opportunities for pupils

• Ultimately, it contributes to working-class underachievement

Labelling shows that achievement is not just about ability, but also about how pupils are perceived and treated.