Education Practice Flashcards (Vocabulary)
UNIT 5: EDUCATION - WORK BOOKLET 6
Key Terms
Global Differences in Education: Differences in educational provision (services), outcomes, and experience in different countries and regions of the world.
Educational Inequality: When different groups are treated or educated differently or have different levels of educational achievement. This is often examined based on differences between social classes, ethnic groups, and genders.
Educational Achievement: How well individuals do in the school system, usually measured by exam results.
Patterns in Educational Achievement & Experience
Social Class
Influence on Educational Achievement: Social class is a major factor influencing educational achievement. Historically, schools primarily served children from privileged families.
20th Century Changes: Until the 20th century, only a minority of lower-class children received an education, which was often brief and simplistic.
**Two-Tier System: **
Tier 1: No schooling or very basic schooling for most children.
Tier 2: Privileged education for the few.
Early Schools in the UK:
Primary schools for working-class children were often run by churches or charities.
Private boarding schools catered to children from the upper class.
Material Deprivation
Material Deprivation: Refers to being unable to afford material goods that are considered necessities in a given society.
Changes in the 20th century indicate that most children now attend similar types of schools; however, the presence of fee-paying schools perpetuates inequality.
**Free School Meals as an Indicator: **
In the UK, free school meals are used to measure social class in schools.
Sociologists assume children eligible for free school meals (lower incomes) come from lower social class backgrounds.
Link Between Free School Meals and Achievement:
Research shows that 36% of children eligible for free school meals achieved grade 4 or higher in Maths and English GCSEs.
In comparison, 66% of non-disadvantaged children achieved the same level, suggesting social class has a more significant impact on achievement than gender or ethnicity.
**Underachievement Factors for Working-Class Children: ** Material deprivation plays a crucial role.
Factors Include:
Lack of a quiet place to study
Inadequate diet affecting concentration and energy
Inability to afford extracurricular materials (e.g., uniforms, kits, equipment, trip costs)
No preschool education leading to cognitive gaps when entering primary school
Lack of access to digital technology, especially significant during COVID-19 (online learning)
Few educational resources at home
Part-time jobs hampering study time and energy.
Cultural and Social Factors
Social Factors
Definition: Factors affecting lifestyle and life chances, such as wealth, religion, and occupation.
Cultural Deprivation:
Explained as deriving from values and attitudes, rather than merely the absence of money/resources.
Sociologists argue that certain cultural aspects of the working class can lead to disadvantages in educational achievement.
Examples of Cultural Deprivation:
Fatalistic Attitude: Working-class children may feel they lack control over their future, discouraging study.
Immediate Gratification: A tendency to prioritize short-term rewards over long-term benefits, leading to early employment over continued education.
Thrill-Seeking: Lacking access to stimulating leisure activities might push boys towards deviant behaviors for excitement.
Parental Attitudes: Lack of appreciation for education can stem from parents' negative school experiences, influencing children's attitudes.
Cultural Capital
Cultural Capital: Knowledge, taste, and values associated with upper classes.
Evaluation of Cultural Deprivation Argument:
a. Criticism exists about whether a distinct working-class culture genuinely exists, questioning the assumed inferiority of such culture.
b. Many working-class parents value education and aim for their children’s success but may lack the self-efficacy to advocate for extra support in schools due to previous negative experiences.
c. The term 'cultural capital' includes children's familiarity with books, experiences (e.g., museum visits), and appreciation for education.
Home and Community Factors
Home Factors
Definition: Factors in a child's home background affecting school performance.
Community Factors: Home life and local community behaviors reinforce educational challenges.
Evidence of Impact:
Learning in disadvantaged schools has fewer resources compared to affluent schools.
Financial inability to support post-secondary education leading to limited ambitions.
Loyalty to socioeconomic status may restrict upward mobility.
Lack of role models can cause students to undervalue education's importance.
Exposure to crime or gangs can hinder educational prospects.
Linguistic Factors
Definition: The type of language children utilize can impact educational achievement.
Basil Bernstein’s Code Theory (1971):
Restricted Code: Informal language with a limited vocabulary used in daily communication.
Elaborated Code: Formal language used in educational settings with explicit vocabulary capable of expressing complex ideas.
Assertion: Middle-class children’s exposure to elaborated code enhances their confidence and academic success compared to working-class peers who predominantly use restricted code.
Compensatory Education
Definition: Policies aiming to support children from disadvantaged backgrounds to bridge the achievement gap.
In-School Factors: Factors within the schooling environment influencing educational outcomes.
Evaluation of Language Codes: While restricted code is used widely, middle-class children can switch between codes, giving them an educational edge.
Government Interest: Governments recognize that low achievement among working-class children poses a systemic issue, leading to attempts at compensatory education, such as increased funding and incentives for disadvantaged schools.
Pro-School/Subcultures
Definition: Groups of learners whose norms align with the school environment, promoting educational success.
Key Researches:
Michael Rutter highlighted the impact of well-organized schools on learner's life chances.
Tim Morris noted enjoyment in schooling correlates positively with later exam success, independent of social class.
Implications: Educational achievement is often linked to school conditions, resources, and expectations, with poorer communities experiencing underfunded educational practices.
Anti-School Subcultures
Definition: Groups of learners whose attitudes conflict with school values.
Characterization: Members may engage in truancy, work avoidance, disrespect toward teachers, or even criminal activities.
Labelling Effect: Working-class children are disproportionately labeled as failures, leading to increased occurrences in anti-school subcultures.
Private Education
Comparison with State Schools: Middle and upper-class children usually access private, fee-based education, resulting in significant disparities in educational outcomes.
Benefits of Private Schools: Smaller class sizes, enhanced attention, superior resources, network links to successful alumni, and better reputations aiding job placements.
Selective Education
Definition: Schools selecting students based on ability predominantly through entrance examinations.
Consequences: Selective systems may reinforce socio-economic divisions, with non-selective systems providing broader community unity.
Conclusion on Education Theories
Functionalism: Education plays a role in societal well-being through socialization, control, and economic functions, promoting meritocracy and social mobility.
Marxism: Education reflects and reinforces class inequalities, imparting ruling class ideology to maintain power dynamics, often resulting in false consciousness among the working class.
Feminism: Education perpetuates gender inequalities, guiding perceptions of capabilities and roles based on patriarchal ideologies.
Summary
Education is not merely a system for academic achievement but a complex web intersecting with social, economic, and cultural factors that shape individual futures and societal trends in various ways. Analyzing these dimensions insightfully reveals profound implications for policymaking and educational reforms.
UNIT 5 EDUCATION: WORK BOOKLET 7:
PATTERNS IN EDUCATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT & EXPERIENCE (continued):
So far in this topic, we have looked at:
-The history of schools, and how education has changed; -Material factors;
-Cultural and social factors; -Cultural capital; -Home and community factors;
-Linguistic factors; -Linguistic factors; -Compensatory education;
-In-school factors (including, pro and anti-school subcultures);
-Selective education; -Private education.
LABELLING THEORY:
What research suggests:
-Research suggests SOCIAL PATTERNS of UNDERACHIEVEMENT in education are affected by the MEANINGS CONSTRUCTED in SCHOOL CLASSROOMS
-LEARNER PROGRESS is affected by the WAYS in which TEACHERS and LEARNERS see each other
-For example, EVIDENCE SHOWING a link between SOCIAL CLASS and ACHIEVEMENT may lead teachers to EXPECT working-class learners to PERFORM POORLY
-These LOW EXPECTATIONS may then CONTRIBUTE to the FAILURE of WORKING-CLASS LEARNERS
What is Labelling theory?
KEY TERM: LABELLING THEORY::defining a person or group in a particular way.
-Labelling theory is a VIEW associated (linked) with INTERACTIONISM
***INTERACTIONISM takes a MICRO approach***
How is labelling theory different from Marxism?
-In LABELLING THEORY, students are NOT SEEN as ‘PASSIVE VICTIMS’ of STRUCTURAL, MATERIAL or CULTURAL FORCES
-A passive victim is someone who suffers harm but does not challenge what is happening to them
-INSTEAD, interactionism FOCUSES on INTERACTIONS BETWEEN INDIVIDUALS, an EXAMPLE follows:
- -EXAMPLE- -
(1) teachers are in a POSITION OF POWER;
(2) the way in which TEACHERS interpret the BEHAVIOUR and POTENTIAL of learners will affect how the teacher interacts with them.
-Teachers JUDGE and CLASSIFY LEARNERS in various ways, such as:
High achieving/ low achieving/ trouble makers/ ideal learners/ lazy / dedicated etc…
-This PROCESS OF LABELLING BY THE TEACHER then INFLUENCES how the LEARNER PERFORMS
-An EARLY JUDGEMENT by a TEACHER can INFLUENCE all future INTERACTIONS WITH THE LEARNER
So what is it that teachers use to judge learners?
-Howard BECKER is an IMPORTANT interactionist
-He argued that TEACHERS judge learners on NON-ACADEMIC FACTORS such as:
(i) Speech; (ii) dress; (iii) personality (cooperative, polite etc); (iv) conduct; (v) appearance.
-BECKER argued THESE FACTORS make-up a STEREOTYPE of what the IDEAL STUDENT is and INFLUENCES TEACHERS’ ASSESSMENTS of the LEARNER’S ABILITY
The social class of the learner:
-When a TEACHER EVALUATES (judges) a STUDENT, the LEARNER’S SOCIAL CLASS can INFLUENCE what the teacher thinks, as follows:
(1) Learners from WORKING CLASS HOMES:
-Teachers often ASSUME that learners from WORKING-CLASS HOMES are POORLY MOTIVATED, lack FAMILY SUPPORT and will be DISRUPTIVE in class;
-The teacher might also THINK that the student LACKS ABILITY, even if they HAVE POTENTIAL;
(2) Learners from MIDDLE-CLASS BACKGROUNDS;
-These learners MOST CLOSELY FIT the teacher’s STEREOTYPE of what the IDEAL STUDENT is
-These learners are MORE LIKELY to enter school as CONFIDENT CHILDREN
-These children are often ALREADY fluent and FAMILIAR WITH LEARNING
-BECAUSE OF THESE FACTORS, teacher might ASSUME the learner has GREATER POTENTIAL and then they are PUSHED to ACHIEVE
The SELF-FULFILLING PROPHECY:
-The way the TEACHER ASSESSES the LEARNER TO BE (e.g., LAZY or HARDWORKING) and the WAY the teacher EVALUATES (JUDGES) the learner can AFFECTS ACHIEVEMENT LEVELS
-For example, the learner might THINK, ‘what's the point of me trying, the teacher thinks I can’t do it?’
-BUT, those LABELLED as BRIGHT are MORE LIKELY to PERFORM WELL (they MEET the TEACHER’S EXPECTATIONS and what the teacher PREDICTS about them)
***In BOTH CASES, the TEACHER’S PREDICTIONS can come TRUE***
-When this comes true, this is called a SELF-FULFILLING PROPHECY
KEY TERM: SELF-FULFILLING PROPHECY::learners fulfil the predictions made by the labels they are given
- -EVALUATION- -
-The IDEA of SELF-FULFILING PROPHECIES suggests the DIFFERENCES between the ATTITUDES and ACHIEVEMENTS OF LEARNERS are CREATED by the PROCESSES of (i) STEREOTYPING by the teacher, and (ii) LABELLING by the teacher.
The SELF-NEGATING PROPHECY:
-This is when a LEARNER is LABELLED by a teacher as UNLIKELY TO DO WELL, but REJECTS the label
-They THEN set out to PROVE THE TEACHER’S LABEL is wrong
-The NEGATIVE LABEL motivates the LEARNER TO WORK HARDER and ACHIEVE SUCCESS
RECAPPING TEACHER LABELLING:
-So, remember the labelling process is as follows:
(a) The teacher labels the learner (often based on appearance or language the learner uses);
(b1) The learner INTERNALISES and ACCEPTS the teacher’s label, creating a SELF-FULFILLING PROPHECY, or
(b2) The learner REJECTS the teacher’s labels and PRODUCES a SELF-NEGATING prophecy.
Labelling and STREAMING/ SETTING:
REMINDER →→STREAMING is when learners in ONE CLASS for ALL LESSONS with OTHER LEARNERS of a SIMILAR ABILITY, e.g., there is a TOP STREAM for those who are HIGH ACHIEVERS, a MIDDLE and LOWER STREAM;
REMINDER →→SETTING is when learners in put in DIFFERENT ABILITY GROUPS for a PARTICULAR SUBJECT;
-STREAMING and SETTING are ANOTHER WAY of labelling learners
-CRITICS of BOTH say they involve PREJUDGING success AND failure
-Learners in the TOP STREAMS and SETS will become CONFIDENT HIGH ACHIEVERS
-Those in LOWER SETS and STREAMS will see THEMSELVES AS FAILURES
-Being placed in a LOWER STREAM or SET may damage the LEARNER’S CONFIDENCE and DISCOURAGE THEM FROM TRYING
-They then MIGHT BECOME DISRUPTIVE and STRUGGLE TO DO WELL, even if they work hard
The link between streaming/setting and social class:
-Streaming AND setting are OFTEN LINKED to SOCIAL CLASS
-The HIGHER a LEARNER’S SOCIAL CLASS, the greater the CHANCE of being PLACED in a TOP-STREAM or TOP SET
-Teachers are OFTEN LESS-AMBITIOUS for learners in LOWER streams/sets, giving them LESS INFORMATION
- - - EVALUATION- - -
-Streaming and setting CAN contribute to the UNDERACHIEVEMENT of WORKING-CLASS STUDENTS
Is there an alternative to streaming and setting?
YES!
-The OPPOSITE is MIXED-ABILITY classes with NO SELECTION
-MANY SCHOOLS use SETTING for SOME SUBJECTS, e.g., MATHS, but MIXED ABILITY TEACHING for SOME SUBJECTS
MARXIST EXPLANATIONS:
***REMEMBER the MARXIST VIEW of education focuses on SOCIAL CLASS***
Boudieu:
-Bourdieu who DEVELOPED THE IDEA OF SOCIAL CLASS is often THOUGHT OF as being a MARXIST
The ‘CLASS POSITION’:
-ANOTHER MARXIST EXPLANATION is called the ‘class position’
-The FRENCH MARXIST Raymond BOUDON though it was ESSENTIAL TO CONSIDER the SOCIAL-CLASS BACKGROUND to UNDERSTAND two things:
(1) the CHOICES made by learners;
(2) the ACHIEVEMENTS made by learners;
The middle-class boy example:
-For EXAMPLE, a BOY from a MIDDLE-CLASS background may see himself as a FAILURE if he does NOT GO TO UNIVERSITY as his PARENTS had ASSUMED he would enter a PROFESSION like MEDICINE
The working-class office worker:
-People from a WORKING-CLASS BACKGROUND who end up working in an OFFICE ROLE may have MOVED FURTHER UP the occupational ladder than their parents
-They COULD BE SEEN AS MORE SUCCESSFUL than someone from a MIDDLE-CLASS BACKGROUND who becomes a LAWYER or a DOCTOR but stays at the SAME LEVEL AS THEIR PARENTS
- - -EVALUATION- - -
-This therefore SUGGESTS that we need to CONSIDER social-class positions when DECIDING HOW WELL LEARNERS have done in the education system
-SOME learners might have moved up MORE than their parents did!
UNIT 5 EDUCATION: WORK BOOKLET 8:
A STUDY ABOUT ANTI-SCHOOL SUBCULTURES:
THE LADS:
-One of the CLASSIC STUDIES of an ANTI-SCHOOL SUBCULTURE is the study by PAUL WILLIS
What did he do?
-He followed a GROUP of WORKING-CLASS BOYS in a SECONDARY SCHOOL in ENGLAND
-The LADS as they were known did NOT come to school to school
-INSTEAD, they came to have a LAUGH, enjoying BREAKING RULES and MISBEHAVING (in AND out of lessons to ANNOY TEACHER)
Their needs:
-The LADS did NOT NEED QUALIFICATIONS for the work they would do in LOCAL FACTORIES, so they saw NO POINT in LEARNING AT SCHOOL
-The lads looked DOWN ON OTHER STUDENTS who did NOT REBEL AGAINST THE SCHOOL
-They ESPECIALLY LOOKED DOWN at a group of BOYS called the “EAR ‘OLES” (because they ALWAYS LISTENED TO THE TEACHER)
—WE WILL NOW SPECIFICALLY LOOK AT EDUCATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT AND EXPERIENCE BASED ON ETHNICITY—
PATTERNS AND EXPLANATIONS FOR DIFFERENCES IN EDUCATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT AND EXPERIENCE BASED ON ETHNICITY:
BACKGROUND POINTS:
-INDIVIDUAL LEARNERS for ALL ETHNIC BACKGROUNDS achieve HIGHLY in education
-HOWEVER, in many countries, LEARNERS FROM SOME MINORITY ETHNIC GROUPS tend to do LESS WELL than the AVERAGE for that country
The USA:
-FOR EXAMPLE, in the USA, there has BEEN CONCERN about:
(1) HISPANIC; (2) AFRICAN-AMERICAN LEARNERS
-STATISTICS from 2018 show that 89.8% of the WHOLE POPULATION had graduated from HIGH SCHOOL
-HOWEVER, for learners from HISPANIC BACKGROUNDS, the rate was 71.6%
-ALSO, in 2018 35% of the WHOLE POPULATION had GRADUATED from COLLEGE
-ASIAN and PACIFIC ISLANDERS were WELL above the average (56.5%)
-HOWEVER, learners from BLACK AMERICAN BACKGROUNDS had a rate of 25.2%, with the rate for HISPANIC learners also being low at 18.3%
The link to social class:
-SOME MINORITY ETHNIC GROUPS have a HIGH PROPORTION of people from the WORKING CLASS
-Thus means they SUFFER from MATERIAL DISADVANTAGES more than OTHER ethnic groups in their HOME COUNTRY
-OTHERS had HIGH STATUS POSITIONS which were LOST when they MOVED TO THEIR NEW COUNTRY, due to (a) DIFFICULTY in ESTABLISHING THEMSELVES, and (b) DISCRIMINATION
EVALUATION: What does this mean?
-This means that the EDUCATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT and EXPERIENCE of children from WORKING-CLASS BACKGROUNDS combine with OTHER FACTORS, e.g., also facing issues with HOME FACTORS, such as coming from a FAMILY WHICH IS NOT FINANCIALLY STABLE
INSTITUTIONAL RACISM:
KEY TERM: INSTITUTIONAL RACISM::when the functioning of an institution or organisation involves systems and expectations that lead to discrimination against an ethnic group
-ONE FACTOR which EXPLAINS LOW ACHIEVEMENT in SOME ETHNIC GROUPS is INSTITUTIONAL RACISM
-INSTITUTIONS IN SOCIETY including the:
(a) EDUCATION SYSTEM, (b) the CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM, (c) the HEALTH SYSTEM; (d) the WELFARE SYSTEM and (e) the EMPLOYMENT MARKET may work in ways which
-deliberately OR unconsciously discriminate AGAINST people from MINORITY ETHNIC GROUPS
An example:
-For example, the CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM can be seen as INSTITUTIONALLY RACIST if the POLICIES and PRACTICES it follows LEAD to people from SOME ETHNIC GROUPS being IMPRISONED more than those in OTHER ETHNIC GROUPS (who may have acted in SIMILAR WAYS)
The impact:
-The IMPACTS of INSTITUTIONAL RACISM may be felt on a DAILY BASIS by people from minority ethnic backgrounds
-Learners from an ETHNIC MINORITY may REACT AGAINST THE RACISM they perceive in SOCIETY by REBELLING AGAINST THE SCHOOL
-For SOME ETHNIC MINORITY LEARNERS, the school may REPRESENT the AUTHORITY of a RACIST SOCIETY
What do some sociologists argue?
-SOME SOCIOLOGISTS ARGUE that the EDUCATION SYSTEM is itself INSTITUTIONALLY RACIST
-There are DIFFERENCES between countries but SOME FEATURES including:
(i) the ETHNOCENTRIC CURRICULUM; (ii) LABELLING by teachers on the BASIS of RACIST STEREOTYPES, can be SEEN AS EVIDENCE of INSTITUTIONAL RACISM within the EDUCATION SYSTEM
ETHNOCENTRIC CURRICULUM:
KEY TERM: ETHNOCENTRISM::the belief that the people, customs and traditions of your own race or country are better than those of other races or countries
-Even in MULTICULTURAL SOCIETIES, there is OFTEN ONE DOMINANT GROUP
Ethnocentrism:
-This OCCURS when the CULTURE OF THE DOMINANT GROUP is PROMOTED as the ONLY or the MOST IMPORTANT ONE
-Ethnocentrism can be UNCONSCIOUS (happen without thinking about) - this is when people in the MAJORITY GROUP assume that their CULTURAL PERSPECTIVE is the ONLY IMPORTANT view
-Ethnocentrism can also COME FROM the MISGUIDED BELIEF that MEMBERS OF MINORITY ETHNIC GROUPS need to be ASSIMILATED into the MAJORITY CULTURE
→→REMINDER: ASSIMILATION: this is the view that people should give up their own culture and traditions, and adopt (take) the host countries cultural norms and values
The ethnocentric curriculum in education:
-In EDUCATION, sociologists argue that MANY COUNTRIES follow an ETHNOCENTRIC CURRICULUM, for example in the FOLLOWING WAYS:
(1) the TEACHING OF LANGUAGE: the language and culture of ETHNIC MINORITY LEARNERS may be seen by the school as BEING OF A LESSER VALUE;
(2) the TEACHING OF LITERATURE: POETRY and BOOKS from the culture of ETHNIC MINORITY STUDENTS may not be considered WORTH STUDYING;
(3) the TEACHING OF HISTORY: learners from ETHNIC MINORITY GROUPS may learn NOTHING about their OWN PEOPLE’S EXPERIENCES;
(4) RELIGION, including WORSHIP in ASSEMBLIES. The ETHNIC MINORITY LEARNERS’ BELIEFS may be IGNORED and they may even be FORCED to follow the practices of the MAJORITY;
(5) CELEBRATION of FESTIVALS based on the DOMINANT CULTURE - ethnic minority learners’ festivals may be IGNORED.
What could the above lead to?
-ETHNIC MINORITY LEARNERS may LOSE INTEREST, believing that LESSONS ARE NOT RELEVANT TO THEM
-They might also come to THINK that their CULTURE IS INFERIOR or UNIMPORTANT, which AFFECTS THEIR CONFIDENCE
Does ethnocentrism only exist with the presence of a dominant group?
-NO!
-It can also exist WITHOUT THE PRESENCE of a dominant group
-MANY COUNTRIES that were ONCE COLONIES still FOLLOW THE EDUCATION SYSTEM of the COLONISING POWER
-For EXAMPLE, SIERRA LEONE in WEST AFRICA was once a BRITISH COLONY
-In SCHOOLS in SIERRA LEONE, teaching is in ENGLISH, although this is NOT THE NATIVE LANGUAGE of the students
-LESSON CONTENT may also be BASED ON THE BRITISH CURRICULUM
-The TEACHING RESOURCES may also be BASED ON THE UK, e.g., WITHOUT information about AFRICAN GEOGRAPHY and CULTURE
ROLE MODELS:
-ONE of the OUTCOMES of INSTITUTIONAL RACISM is a LACK OF ROLE MODELS for CHILDREN from MINORITY ETHNIC GROUPS
-This may either be (1) in SCHOOL, such as a lack of ethnic minority teachers, or (2) be in WIDER SOCIETY, such as a lack of ETHNIC MINORITY business man, politicians etc…
What does this do?
-BECAUSE OF LACKING ROLE MODELS, learners from MINORITY ETHNIC GROUPS might LIMIT their AMBITIONS because they BELIEVE they do NOT have the SAME OPPORTUNITIES as learners from the MAJORITY ETHNIC GROUP
LINGUISTIC FACTORS:
-MINORITY ETHNIC GROUPS may be TAUGHT in a language that is NOT THEIR NATIVE LANGUAGE
-This is the case for MANY CHILDREN in LOWER-INCOME COUNTRIES, where schools use the LANGUAGE OF FORMER COLONISERS, e.g., ENGLISH or FRENCH
-The learners SPEAK OTHER LANGUAGES at home, so they MIGHT FIND IT DIFFICULT to UNDERSTAND SUBJECTS that are TAUGHT IN THE COLONIAL LANGUAGE
Devaluing learners’ native languages:
-In SOME CASES, the native languages of learners are DEVALUED and are seen as INAPPROPRIATE for SCHOOL
-FOR EXAMPLE, the KIND OF LANGUAGE SPOKEN by some MINORITY ETHNIC GROUPS may be THOUGHT by teachers to be UNGRAMMATICAL, WRONG and being a sign (an iNDICATION) of a LACK of INTELLIGENCE or EDUCATION
-For EXAMPLE, there is a TYPE of LANGUAGE USED by AFRICAN AMERICANS
-It is CALLED, ‘AFRICAN AMERICAN VERNACULAR ENGLISH’ (AAVE)
-It WAS widely ASSUMED to be an UNGRAMMATICAL and SUBSTANDARD form of English
-TEACHERS discouraged learners from using it
The AMERICAN LINGUIST William LABOV:
-LABOV found that AAVE had a GRAMMATICAL STRUCTURE and COULD be used to EXPRESS COMPLEX and ABSTRACT IDEAS
-BEFORE LABOV’S STUDY, African American learners who USED AAVE would have BEEN MARKED DOWN, even if they HAD THE SAME LEVEL of understanding AND ability as LEARNERS using STANDARD ENGLISH
-Learners who USED AAVE were held back (DISADVANTAGED) in education because they USED IT
Speaking more than one language:
-Being able to USE more than ONE LANGUAGE, e.g., being BILINGUAL or POLYLINGUAL can be an ADVANTAGE
-It can FACILITATE (help) a STUDENTS’ ABILITY to learn
CULTURAL, MATERIAL AND SOCIAL FACTORS:
-The ETHNIC BACKGROUND OF LEARNERS, including (1) CULTURAL; (2) MATERIAL; (3) SOCIAL FACTORS can INFLUENCE their ACHIEVEMENT in MANY WAYS
Some examples:
(a) a LEARNER’S CULTURE may or MAY NOT place a HIGH VALUE on LEARNING and ACADEMIC SUCCESS;
(b) If CULTURAL VALUES (related to RELIGION or OTHER VIEWS) clash with the VALUES of the SCHOOL, this CAN SLOW a LEARNER’S PROGRESS;
(c) a LEARNER’S DRESS, APPEARANCE of WAY OF SPEAKING may REINFORCE a STEREOTYPE held by TEACHERS in relation to ETHNICITY
-This could LEAD TO A SELF-FULFILLING PROPHECY
-Due to a COMBINATION of ETHNICITY and SOCIAL CLASS, a minority ETHNIC LEARNER’S FAMILY may have LESS CULTURAL CAPITAL - this can LIMIT THEIR EDUCATIONAL SUCCESS;
(d) MATERIAL FACTORS, e.g., a LACK OF MONEY to BUY RESOURCES or ACCESS SCHOOL TRIPS can ESPECIALLY AFFECT CHILDREN from CERTAIN MINORITIES
-They are MORE LIKELY TO BE WORKING-CLASS
HOME & COMMUNITY FACTORS:
-Louise ARCHER researched why children with CHINESE BACKGROUNDS IN UK SCHOOLS were so SUCCESSFUL compared with children from OTHER ETHNIC GROUPS
What did Archer find:
(1) She found that CHINESE PARENTS VALUED EDUCATION HIGHLY
-They INVESTED TIME AND MONEY in their CHILDREN’S EDUCATION, even if they weren’t wealth;
(2) Children were SOCIALISED to see educational success as very important
-Their PARENTS talked with them FREQUENTLY ABOUT THEIR SCHOOLWORK and about PLANNING THEIR CAREER
-They had CLEAR GOALS;
Archer’s interviews:
-Archer INTERVIEWED SEVERAL LEARNERS
-One of the LEARNERS explained that while WHITE BRITISH CHILDREN are TOLD TO DO ‘THEIR BEST’, Chinese children are told to “be the best”
-This STRONG MOTIVATION from CHINESE LEARNERS’ CULTURAL BACKGROUND was an IMPORTANT FACTOR LEADING TO THEIR HIGH ACHIEVEMENT
Evaluation:
-This RESEARCH SUGGESTS that the INFLUENCE OF CULTURE, HOME BACKGROUND, UPBRINGING and a LEARNER’S ETHNIC COMMUNITY can MAKE A SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE to educational outcomes
IN-SCHOOL FACTORS:
-To be MERITOCRATIC, schools NEED TO ENSURE that ALL LEARNERS have EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES to SUCCEED
-HOWEVER, schools may be INSTITUTIONALLY RACIST in the FOLLOWING WAYS:
(i) They could DISCRIMINATE when PLACING LEARNERS in STREAMS and SETS
-Learners from MINORITY ETHNIC GROUPS may be placed in LOWER STREAMS or SETS as a result of ASSUMPTIONS based on their ETHNICITY, rather than their INDIVIDUAL ABILITY;
(ii) Many schools have an ETHNOCENTRIC CURRICULUM;
(iii) Teachers MIGHT ASSUME that LEARNERS FROM MINORITY ETHNIC GROUPS are UNABLE TO DO WELL, or label them as ‘TROUBLEMAKERS;
-This could cause a SELF-FULFILLING PROPHECY;
(iv) Schools may NOT DEAL WITH RACISM from student TOWARDS MINORITY ETHNIC GROUPS
-Racism is SOMETIMES treated as UNIMPORTANT, despite the damage it can do
IN-SCHOOL FACTOR: PRO and ANTI-SCHOOL SUBCULTURES:
***REMINDER:PRO AND ANTI-SCHOOL SUBCULTURES are an IMPORTANT IN-SCHOOL FACTOR***
-They can be FORMED based on ETHNICITY as WELL AS SOCIAL CLASS
Tony SEWELL:
-In a BOOK titled, ‘Black Masculinities and Schooling’ in 1997, SEWELL studied AFRICAN-CARIBBEAN BOYS in a BRITISH SECONDARY SCHOOL
-The boys were part of an ANTI-SCHOOL SUBCULTURE
-H referred to the boys as the ‘REBELS’
-They were SO OPPOSED to the SCHOOL’S RULES that the boys were SOMETIMES VIOLENT towards other LEARNERS AND STAFF (the boys were AGGRESSIVELY MASCULINE)
What did Sewell argue:
-Sewell saw the BOYS BEHAVIOURS PARTLY as a RESPONSE TO RACIST TEACHERS and RACISM IN THE SCHOOL
-HOWEVER, Sewell also FOUND other AFRICAN-CARIBBEAN LEARNERS who RESPONDED to the SCHOOL in DIFFERENT WAYS
-He CONCLUDED that the REBELS should NOT be seen as typical of ALL AFRICAN-CARIBBEAN BOYS
→→EVALUATION: Anti-school subcultures do NOT always show a SIMPLE REJECTION of the school AND academic success
-They CAN be MORE COMPLICATED
Martin Mac an Ghaill:
-MAC AN GHAILL described a group of FEMALE LEARNERS from MINORITY ETHNIC GROUPS in UK COLLEGES who SUCCEEDED
-This was DESPITE the learners being STRONGLY CRITICAL OF THE EDUCATION SYSTEM
-The learners MAC AN GHAILL studied were called ‘the BLACK SISTERS’
Mac an Ghaill and the Black Sisters:
-The BLACK SISTERS were from AFRICAN-CARIBBEAN and ASIAN BACKGROUNDS
-They were STUDYING in an INNER-CITY COLLEGE, studying their A-LEVELS
-They did NOT LIKE THE COLLEGE or the SCHOOLS they had been to BEFORE
-The BLACK SISTERS criticised (1) the way in which STREAMING had DISCRIMINATED against them and (2) the TEACHERS’ FAILURE to recognise THEIR ABILITY and the ETHNOCENTRIC CURRICULUM
-HOWEVER, the BLACK SISTERS decided that it was IMPORTANT to them to SUCCEED IN EDUCATION
-They WORKED HARD, even WHILE REJECTING THE COLLEGE’S AUTHORITY and they DID VERY WELL
→→EVALUATION: The BLACK SISTERS subculture COULD BE DESCRIBED as ANTI-SCHOOL, but they WERE PRO-EDUCATION
LABELLING THEORY:
What teachers often do:
-Teachers OFTEN MAKE ASSUMPTIONS about learners from DIFFERENT GROUPS BY LABELLING THEM
-This can LEAD TO SELF-FULFILLING PROPHECIES
-For EXAMPLE, learners from MINORITY ETHNIC GROUPS may be MORE LIKELY be PUT in LOW STREAMS/ SETS
-This may be BECAUSE OF LANGUAGE DIFFERENCES or TEACHERS’ STEREOTYPES, rather than the ability of the learner
The UK:
-In the UK, it COULD BE ARGUED that MANY AFRICAN-CARIBBEAN LEARNERS are LABELLED AND STEREOTYPED by SCHOOLS
-COMPARED to OTHER ETHNIC GROUPS, much HIGHER PROPORTIONS of AFRICAN-CARIBBEAN BOYS are EXCLUDED FROM SCHOOL
-WHILE there MAY INITIALLY have been BAD BEHAVIOUR from SOME BOYS in this GROUP, this has LED to AN EXPECTATION of POOR BEHAVIOUR from all AFRICAN-CARIBBEAN BOYS
→→EVALUATION: Because of this, TEACHERS LABEL THESE BOYS and have LOW EXPECTATION of them
-The BOYS are OFTEN FROM WORKING-CLASS BACKGROUNDS, who MAY STRUGGLE at SCHOOL
-Their EXTROVERTED (very outgoing) BEHAVIOUR which might be ACCEPTED IN OTHER CONTEXTS (situations) LEADS THEM TO BEING LABELLED as ‘TROUBLEMAKERS’
Rejecting labels:
-It can be VERY DIFFICULT to REJECT LABELS LIKE THIS
-They CAN BECOME a ‘MASTER STATUS’
-This means the LABEL BECOMES the single most important thing about the person in the EYES OF OTHERS
-The label is then INTERNALISED by the person who is labelled and THEY COME TO BELIEVE that it DESCRIBES THEM CORRECTLY
For example:
1. A boy who has been labelled as a TROUBLEMAKER;
2. He may be SUSPECTED whenever SOMETHING GOES WRONG, even when innocent;
3. He may start to BELIEVE that he is ‘TROUBLE’ and make choices based on this;
4. He might FEEL there is NO POINT TRYING TO BEHAVE, because he will be blamed anyway
***this leads to the SELF-FULFILLING PROPHECY***
Back to Archer and HOW LABELS WORK IN DIFFERENT WAYS:
(1) How labels from teachers work:
-The CHINESE LEARNERS studied by ARCHER found that TEACHERS HAD HIGH EXPECTATIONS of them, but this was NOT NECESSARILY A GOOD THING!
-The CHINESE LEARNERS received LITTLE PRAISE for DOING WELL, because their success was ONLY TO BE EXPECTED
-When the CHINESE LEARNERS had DIFFICULTIES, teachers GAVE THEM LITTLE HELP because they ASSUMED they COULD HELP THEMSELVES
(2) How labels from fellow students or peers work:
-Archer found MANY SCHOOLS had VERY FEW CHINESE LEARNERS
-BECAUSE OF THIS, Chinese learners were NOT ABLE to form a PEER GROUP OF THEIR OWN
-The OTHER NON-CHINESE LEARNERS often had HIGH EXPECTATIONS of the Chinese learners and labelled them as ‘GEEKS’
-This shows that LABELLING can be done by PEERS as well
-A label like ‘GEEK’ suggests ACADEMIC ABILITY and a DESIRE TO PLEASE TEACHERS are NEGATIVE
-BECAUSE OF THIS, learners MAY TRY TO REJECT THE LABEL, stop working hard and SEEK APPROVAL OF THEIR PEERS instead
UNIT 5 EDUCATION: WORK BOOKLET 9:
PATTERNS AND EXPLANATIONS FOR DIFFERENCES IN EDUCATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT AND EXPERIENCE BASED ON GENDER:
GENDER INEQUALITIES:
-In MOST COUNTRIES, there are CLEAR DIFFERENCES between the educational achievement and experiences of BOYS and GIRLS
-These GENDER INEQUALITIES in education have CHANGED OVER TIME and VARY BETWEEN COUNTRIES
KEY TERM: GENDER INEQUALITIES::differences in experiences and outcomes for males and females; for example, in terms of educational achievement
The boys (HISTORICAL POSITION):
-Boys have ALWAYS BEEN MORE LIKELY to go to school, COMPLETE EDUCATION and GET QUALIFICATIONS
-This is BECAUSE schooling for boys was seen as MORE IMPORTANT to help them find WORK, which would ALLOW THEM TO SUPPORT A FAMILY
The girls (HISTORICAL POSITION):
-SCHOOLING FOR GIRLS was seen as LESS IMPORTANT
-Even girls who were DOING WELL AT SCHOOL, they might LEAVE TO HELP THEIR FAMILY or GET MARRIED (all WITHOUT COMPLETING THEIR EDUCATION) -In MOST COUNTRIES (including the UK) this was the CASE until the LATE 20TH CENTURY
***CHANGES TO EDUCATION*** then led to MORE EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES for BOYS and GIRLS with ALL LEARNERS STAYING IN SCHOOL until they TOOK EXAMS and OBTAINED QUALIFICATIONS.
What soon became clear?
-It soon became CLEAR THAT GIRLS WERE DOING BETTER than BOYS IN MOST SUBJECTS at GCSE LEVEL.
-Without CLEAR PATTERNS as there are with SOCIAL CLASS AND ETHNICITY, the questions sociologists ask ABOUT GENDER AND ACHIEVEMENT are different, including:
(1) How are girls disadvantaged now?
(2) How were girls disadvantaged in the past?
(3) Why are girls now doing better than boys in some countries, e.g., the UK? (4) Why do boys underachieve in some countries?
DIFFERENTIAL GENDERED SOCIALISATION AND SOCIAL CONTROL: -Boys and girls are SOCIALISED INTO DIFFERENT GENDER ROLES -By the time they START SCHOOL, children have CLEAR IDEAS about the BEHAVIOUR AND ATTITUDES which are APPROPRIATE to BOTH SEXES
Where are these ideas learnt?
-The sexes learn these IDEAS from the CULTURE THEY ARE GROWING UP IN -Girls may be INFLUENCED to SEE THEIR FUTURE in terms of MARRIAGE and MOTHERHOODS, not a profession and career
-MOST BOYS will marry and BECOME PARENTS but they are LIKELY TO SEE THEIR FUTURE more in terms of work
-GIRLS may be socialised into FEELING THAT qualifications are UNNECESSARY FOR THEM, so they do NOT have to work hard in school
-They might EXPECT to work when they LEAVE SCHOOL BUT ONLY FOR A FEW YEARS
-ON THE OTHER HAND, a GOOD EDUCATION can SOMETIMES help a GIRL FIND A HIGH-STATUS husband, so MARRIAGE AND EDUCATION cannot be regarded (thought of) as TWO SIMPLE ALTERNATIVES.
The shift in modern industrial societies:
-In MODERN INDUSTRIAL TIMES, there has been a SHIFT AWAY from the TRADITIONAL GENDER ROLES
-TODAY girls are MORE LIKELY to have CAREER AIMS and to be MOTIVATED TO WORK HARD IN SCHOOL to achieve these AIMS
-This MAY EXPLAIN WHY girls are NOW doing BETTER
***Their SOCIALISATION HAS CHANGED and having a CAREER is NOW SEEN AS MORE IMPORTANT***
-Girls ATTITUDES and MOTIVATIONS have CHANGED because there are MORE OPPORTUNITIES FOR THEM and there are MORE ROLE MODELS (successful WOMEN who act as ROLE MODELS for GIRLS)
-Girls KNOW they do NOT HAVE TO become housewives and mothers, they can HAVE A CAREER as WELL or INSTEAD!
Traditional male manual jobs:
-In MANY MODERN INDUSTRIAL COUNTRIES there ARE fewer TRADITIONAL MALE MANUAL JOBS, e.g., in MINING compared to the past
-This has MADE IT MORE IMPORTANT to GAIN QUALIFICATIONS in order to ACCESS OTHER CAREERS, e.g., in ICT/business/finance
-HOWEVER, in countries with a DIFFICULT ECONOMIC SITUATION and where MOST JOBS AVAILABLE to men are still MANUAL JOBS, boys may FEEL THAT THERE IS LITTLE POINT in WORKING HARD to pass exams
-This is BECAUSE they are UNLIKELY TO NEED qualifications for the job they will DO IN THE FUTURE
Gendered socialisation:
KEY TERM: GENDERED SOCIALISATION::the way that males and females are taught the expectations relating to their gender roles.
-GENDERED SOCIALISATION can ALSO AFFECT LEARNERS’ SUBJECT CHOICES -When CHOICES are AVAILABLE, e.g., at GCSE LEVEL and for HIGHER QUALIFICATIONS - there are CLEAR DIFFERENCES between SUBJECTS are CHOSEN
***SOCIALISATION*** is a FACTOR HERE:
-BOYS and GIRLS absorb messages about WHAT IS APPROPRIATE for EACH GENDER, which may be LINKED TO:
(a) GENDER ROLES in society and.
(b) what CAREERS are AVAILABLE TO MEN and WOMEN
-For EXAMPLE in MANY COUNTRIES:
(1) BOYS are MORE LIKELY to PURSUE technical SUBJECTS, e.g., MATHS/ PHYSICS and COMPUTING going into CAREERS like ACCOUNTANCY, COMPUTER PROGRAMMING and ENGINEERING;
(2) GIRLS are more LIKELY to CONTINUE with SUBJECTS such as HISTORY, SOCIOLOGY and LITERATURE pursuing CAREERS in TEACHING and NURSING.
TEACHER EXPECTATIONS:
-Boys and girls MAY BE TREATED differently in SCHOOLS
-For EXAMPLE, teachers may believe that POOR STUDY HABITS and BEHAVIOURS are ‘NORMAL’ for BOYS, whilst SIMILAR BEHAVIOUR for GIRLS IS NOT TOLERATED -This may relate to GENDER STEREOTYPES and EXPECTATIONS as MALES are TRADITIONALLY EXPECTED to be more OUTGOING, CONFIDENT and DOMINANT
→→REMINDER: ***DON’T FORGET in BOOKLET 5 we LOOKED at HOW FEMINISTS argue teachers are LIKELY TO HAVE LOWER EXPECTATIONS of girls and are LESS LIKELY TO ENCOURAGE girls to study hard!
CULTURAL AND SOCIALFACTORS:
-When LOOKING at DIFFERENCES in EDUCATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT material AND cultural deprivation are LESS RELEVANT to GENDER than they are when LOOKING at achievement based on SOCIAL CLASS and ETHNICITY
-HOWEVER, where a FAMILY has LIMITED RESOURCES to SPEND ON EDUCATION, girls’ education may be SEEN AS LESS IMPORTANT than BOYS
-BECAUSE OF THIS, the RESOURCES that are AVAILABLE may be USED TO EDUCATE SONS, rather than daughters
What has research found?
-RESEARCH has found DIFFERENCES in the APPROACH that GIRLS and BOYS take to their studies
-GIRLS seem to be BETTER MOTIVATED and WORK more consistently OVER LONG PERIODS
-FOR EXAMPLE, girls (a) spend MORE TIME ON HOMEWORK; (b) CONCENTRATE BETTER IN CLASS and (c) are BETTER ORGANISED
-They also seem to BENEFIT MORE from COURSEWORK and CONTINUOUS ASSESSMENT (working STEADILY OVER A PERIOD, rather than EXAMINATIONS)
Explanations for these differences:
-The differences COULD HAVE SEVERAL EXPLANATIONS:
(i) It has been ARGUED that GIRLS MATURE EARLIER than boys -Therefore by the AGE OF 16 (where in MANY COUNTRIES exams are taken), girls are MORE LIKELY TO RECOGNISE the iMPORTANCE of STUDYING HARD;
(ii) Differences in ATTITUDE TOWARDS EDUCATION could be RELATED to GENDER SOCIALISATION and PEER PRESSURE
-Girls are MORE LIKELY to underestimate THEIR ABILITY and BELIEVE that they HAVE TO WORK HARD to succeed
-WHEREAS boys can be TOO CONFIDENT, overestimating their ABILITY and BELIEVING they can do WELL without working hard;
(iii) Hard work may be seen as more acceptable by female peer groups, whereas BOYS are more likely to FORM ANTI-SCHOOL SUBCULTURES
-For SOME BOYS, especially those from a WORKING-CLASS BACKGROUND, studying hard may NOT BE SEEN as MASCULINE
-BECAUSE of this this there may be SOCIAL PRESSURES on BOYS not to TRY HARD AT SCHOOL
Reading and writing:
-MOST SCHOOLWORK is based on READING AND WRITING
-BOYS tend to have DIFFERENT SKILLS AND INTERESTS
-They would be BETTER if MORE SCHOOLWORK was ACTIVE and PRACTICAL -BOYS might also BELIEVE that READING is MORE APPROPRIATE FOR GIRLS
***A LINK TO PRIMARY SOCIALISATION***:
-IT has been SUGGESTED that MOTHERS ARE MORE LIKELY TO READ to their YOUNG CHILDREN compared to fathers
-BECAUSE OF THIS, boys AND girls may see READING as a FEMALE ACTIVITY
ACCESS TO EDUCATION:
-In SOME COUNTRIES, girls have LESS ACCESS TO EDUCATION than BOYS and OFTEN leave education at an earlier age
-This MAY BE DUE to FINANCIAL CONSTRAINTS or CULTURAL REASONS (we will look at this MORE below in a later subtopic!)
IN-SCHOOLFACTORS:
-AS WELL as the GENDERED CURRICULUM and DIFFERENCES IN SUBJECT CHOICE, the ORGANISATION of SCHOOLS (e.g., the HIDDEN CURRICULUM) may give LEARNERS THE MESSAGE that GENDER is important
-BOYS AND GIRLS may think that DIFFERENT EXPECTATIONS apply to them
An example:
(1) REGISTERS may be SEPARATED into BOYS AND GIRLS and SEATING PLANS may be based on GENDER;
(2) SCHOOL UNIFORMS are USUALLY DIFFERENT for BOYS AND GIRLS.
Classroom activities and textbooks:
-Some CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES, e.g.,. SCIENCE EXPERIMENTS may be DOMINATED BY BOYS
-TEXTBOOKS in subjects such as SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY may show boys rather than GIRLS in their ILLUSTRATIONS
-There may be MORE MALE TEACHERS delivering SCIENCE/TECHNOLOGY in some schools
-What this leads to: These factors can GIVE GIRLS THE MESSAGE that SOME SUBJECTS are not for them
-FOR THE SAME REASONS, boys MAY be put off subjects such as DANCE or DOMESTIC SCIENCE (e.g., learning about cooking!)
Effort by schools:
-In MOST COUNTRIES, schools NOW MAKE AN EFFORT to ensure that GIRLS have the SAME OPPORTUNITIES as boys to study and succeed
-ADVICE from TEACHERS is MORE LIKELY to encourage students to PURSUE any careers which interest them, regardless of gender
-SOME NATIONS have DEVELOPED programmes and POLICIES to ENCOURAGE GIRLS to AIM HIGHER, especially in SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY -These SCHEMES might give EXTRA RESOURCES for SCHOOLS and RUN CONFERENCES with SUCCESSFUL FEMALES acting as role models
Leadership in schools:
-TEACHING is a FEMALE-DOMINATED PROFESSION in many countries -HOWEVER, the SENIOR LEVELS IN TEACHING and in EDUCATION IN GENERAL are DOMINATED BY MEN
-EVEN IN PRIMARY SCHOOLS (where there are GENERALLY MORE FEMALE TEACHERS) 50% of the HEAD TEACHERS in the UK are MALE
-AS A CONSEQUENCE, even though BOYS have FEWER ROLE MODELS among teachers, those they DO HAVE are LIKELY to be SENIOR STAFF -GIRLS may also GET THE IMPRESSION that WOMEN DO NOT GO INTO LEADERSHIP
Peer groups:
-PEER GROUPS in MIXED SCHOOLS (CO-EDUCATIONAL SCHOOLS) tend to be SINGLE-SIX
-The STUDIES by MAC AN GHAILL AND SEWELL (booklet 8 about ethnicity!) can also be LINKED to GENDER
-FEMALE PEER GROUPS are more likely to be PRO-SCHOOL sharing the school’s norms and values
-Girls often SUPPORT each other in their studies
-BOYS are MORE LIKELY to belong to ANTI-SCHOOL SUBCULTURES -They MAY BE AFFECTED by a MASCULINE CULTURE which VALUES RESPECT from MALE PEERS above academic achievement
-SOME BOYS may think they will LOSE STATUS in the eyes of their PEERS if they WORK HARD or do WELL ACADEMICALLY (as these QUALITIES are associated with FEMALES)
-BOYS INSTEAD try to GAIN RESPECT by CHALLENGING AUTHORITY which MAY GET THEM IN TROUBLE and stop them MAKING PROGRESS
A recent development:
-RECENTLY in the UK according to RESEARCH by Carolyn JACKSON more WORKING-CLASS GIRLS in British SECONDARY SCHOOL are BEHAVING IN WAYS which were PREVIOUSLY ASSOCIATED with WORKING-CLASS BOYS -This includes BEHAVIOURS such as: (1) FIGHTING; (2) SWEARING and (3) being AGGRESSIVE
-This involves ONLY a MINORITY OF GIRLS but it SHOWS that WORKING HARD is SEEN by some girls as UNCOOL
-JACKSON suggested that NOT WORKING WAS A METHOD of self-protection from the EFFECTS OF FAILURE
-IF LEARNERS did NOT DO WELL, they COULD CLAIM that it was BECAUSE THEY DID NOT CARE or TRY HARD
-This COULD BE A RESPONSE to the PRESSURE on BOTH BOYS AND GIRLS to do WELL and CHALLENGES FACED by LEARNERS from WORKING-CLASS BACKGROUNDS in RELATION TO THESE PRESSURES
LABELLING THEORY (remember this is part of a BIGGER THEORY called INTERACTIONISM):
-TEACHER LABELLING can APPLY TO GENDER, not just social class AND ethnicity -Teachers may MAKE ASSUMPTIONS about gender, giving BOYS and GIRLS different KINDS OF ATTENTION
Girls:
-Girls are (i) PRAISED for THEIR APPEARANCE; (ii) good BEHAVIOUR; (iii) NEATNESS of work
Boys:
-(1) INDIVIDUALITY and (2) CREATIVITY are more HIGHLY VALUED by teachers
Problems:
-Boys are MORE LIKELY to be LABELLED AS PROBLEMS by TEACHERS and BY SCHOOLS
-Of LEARNERS EXCLUDED from BRITISH SCHOOLS due to BAD BEHAVIOUR each year LESS THAN ONE IN FIVE are GIRLS
-This DOES NOT MEAN that girls do NOT HAVE PROBLEMS
-HOWEVER, girls are LESS LIKELY to ACT OUT THEIR PROBLEMS in a way that DEMANDS ATTENTION
→→REMINDER: Being labelled in a negative way may lead to a SELF-FULFILLING PROPHECY and can be a CAUSE OF UNDERACHIEVEMENT
FEMINIST EXPLANATIONS:
→→REMINDER: FEMINIST SOCIOLOGISTS focus on the EXPERIENCE and ACHIEVEMENT OF GIRLS in what they SEE AS A PATRIARCHAL EDUCATION SYSTEM inside of a PATRIARCHAL SOCIETY
The last 30 years:
-OVER THE LAST 30 YEARS since GIRLS have STARTED TO OUTPERFORM boys in MANY COUNTRIES lots of political attention has been paid to the REASONS why BOYS UNDERACHIEVE
-FEMNISTS POINT OUT that there was FAR LESS INTEREST IN GENDER INEQUALITY in education when GIRLS WERE UNDERACHIEVING -Feminists ALSO point out that there are CONTINUING DISADVANTAGES FOR GIRLS which tend to get LESS ATTENTION
What girls still face according to Feminists:
-Girls STILL FACE the following in education:
(1) Lack of CONFIDENCE in their ABILITY;
(2) DOMINANCE of BOYS IN CLASSROOMS;
(3) Receiving LESS OF TEACHERS’ TIME than boys;
(4) GENDERED subject CHOICES;
(5) ASSUMPTIONS by TEACHERS
-It SEEMS LIKELY that GIRLS would have an IMPROVED EXPERIENCE in education if these PROBLEMS COULD BE OVERCOME
-ADDRESSING these issues MAY LEAD TO RELATED IMPROVEMENTS in LIFE CHANCES for WOMEN, especially in EMPLOYMENT
GLOBAL DIFFERENCES IN EDUCATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT:
AVAILABILITY OF SCHOOLS:
-In MANY COUNTRIES, accessible schooling for ALL CHILDREN is a fairly NEW DEVELOPMENT
-For EXAMPLE, when MANY AFRICAN COUNTRIES became independent in the 1950s AND 1960s - they had VERY FEW SCHOOLS
What about the schools that did exist?
-The schools that DID EXIST were MAINLY for the CHILDREN of the COLONIAL ADMINISTRATORS (officials) and OTHER STAFF
-MOST PEOPLE did NOT have access to a SCHOOL, except for a FEW FAITH SCHOOLS
-Countries such as SIERRA LEONE needed to BUILD A NATIONAL SCHOOL SYSTEM with limited resources (they had LITTLE MONEY and STAFF, FEW TEACHERS and TEACHING MATERIALS)
What about today?
-In SOME COUNTRIES today, there are STILL NOT ENOUGH SCHOOLS for ALL THE CHILDREN
-Children in RURAL AND REMOTE AREAS might have to TRAVEL A LONG DISTANCE EACH DAY to get to the NEAREST SCHOOL
-CLASS SIZES in SOME SCHOOLS ARE VERY LARGE, often with OVER 50 children in ONE CLASS!
-The schools that ARE AVAILABLE may NOT BE ABLE TO PROVIDE A GOOD EDUCATION
-This is because they might LACK NECESSITIES SUCH AS:
(1) electricity; (2) drinking water; (3) toilets; (4) ventilated classrooms; (5) books/teaching resources; (6) special equipment, e.g., science labs; (7) qualified teachers; (8) a safe secure school site.
POVERTY and WEALTH:
-MANY CHILDREN still do NOT go to school OR they LEAVE SCHOOL WITHOUT FINISHING
-This is because their FAMILIES ARE POOR
-CHILDREN CAN WORK either helping with a FAMILY FARM or BUSINESS, or DOING HOUSEHOLD TASK
-This means their parents have MORE TIME TO EARN MONEY TO SUPPORT THE FAMILY
Making sense of things:
-MANY COUNTRIES have MADE EDUCATION FREE to encourage MORE CHILDREN TO GO TO SCHOOL
-HOWEVER, there are still SOME COSTS, e.g., UNIFORM and BOOKS -ALSO the time that CHILDREN SPEND IN SCHOOL means they CANNOT SPEND THAT TIME HELPING THEIR FAMILY
-FOR SOME FAMILIES, even if EDUCATION IS FREE, it makes MORE SENSE FOR THE CHILD NOT TO GO TO SCHOOL
Poverty and POOR HEALTH:
-POVERTY is also LINKED TO POOR HEALTH
-BECAUSE of (1) DIET and (2) LIVING CONDITIONS, children from POOR FAMILIES are MORE LIKELY TO BE ILL and MISS SCHOOL
-In PARTS OF AFRICA, many children MISS A LOT OF SCHOOL because they have MALARIA or OTHER DISEASES - they then FALL BEHIND IN THEIR STUDIES
Other factors:
-OTHER FACTORS related to poverty ALSO IMPACT ACHIEVEMENT -For EXAMPLE, children WHOSE HOMES do NOT have ELECTRICITY will find it MUCH HARDER TO STUDY after dark
Wealthy families:
-At the OTHER END OF THE SCALE, wealthy families can BUY THE EDUCATION THEY WANT for their children
-SOME have a PRIVATE TUTOR who provides ONE-TO-ONE TEACHING outside school
-This GIVES the CHILDREN OF WEALTHY FAMILIES an ADVANTAGE and makes it MORE LIKELY that they will achieve whatever their ability
ACCESS TO EDUCATION FOR GIRLS:
The past:
-As we have LOOKED AT, in the past, MOST SCHOOLING WAS RESERVED FOR BOYS
-Girls received VERY LITTLE EDUCATION
Developing countries:
-In SOME DEVELOPING COUNTRIES, boys are STILL MORE LIKELY to go to SCHOOL than girls
-This often BECAUSE parents think the EDUCATION OF THEIR SONS IS MORE IMPORTANT
-The FUTURE OF A BOY is seen in term of (1) a SUCCESSFUL CAREER; (2) being able to SUPPORT his OWN FAMILY when he grows up; (3) PERHAPS being able to SUPPORT HIS AGEING PARENTS
-HOWEVER, a GIRL may BE EXPECTED to MARRY
-She will JOIN HER HUSBAND’S FAMILY, perhaps taking their FAMILY NAME and her MAIN RESPONSIBILITY will be to them
-For a FAMILY with LIMITED INCOME, paying for A DAUGHTER’S EDUCATION, or LOSING HER CONTRIBUTION to the family WHILST SHE IS AT SCHOOL may seem unnecessary
The experience of schools for girls:
-Girls can ALSO FIND THE EXPERIENCE of SCHOOL DIFFICULT -For EXAMPLE, about ONE IN THREE SCHOOLS IN AFRICA has NO TOILETS -Where there are NO TOILETS or they are POOR QUALITY, girls may STAY WAY FROM school when they are on their PERIOD to avoid embarrassment
The UNITED NATIONS:
-The UNITED NATIONS and its MEMBER GOVERNMENTS are STRONGLY COMMITTED to education for girls
-It is seen as a HUMAN RIGHT and an ESSENTIAL PART of a COUNTRY’S DEVELOPMENT
-One of the UN’s ‘GLOBAL SUSTAINABILITY GOALS’ is that ALL young people and MOST ADULTS should achieve LITERACY and NUMERACY by 2030
-HOWEVER, to achieve this GOAL, there needs to be a HUGE INCREASE in EDUCATION FOR GIRLS
-UNESCO estimates that 129 MILLION SCHOOL-AGED girls WORLDWIDE do NOT go to school
What happens when more girls go to school?
-Where MORE GIRLS GO TO SCHOOL, there are NUMEROUS BENEFITS for (a) FAMILIES; (b) SOCIETY; (c) individuals
-It has BEEN SHOWN that EDUCATING GIRLS has POSITIVE OUTCOMES in IMPROVING the LIVING STANDARDS, health AND nutrition of FAMILIES
-For EXAMPLE, better educated women are MORE INFORMED about NUTRITION and HEALTHCARE, they can TEACH their FAMILIES about it as WELL -THEY often MARRY AT A LATER AGE and if they CHOOSE to become MOTHERS, have FEWER and HEALTHIER CHILDREN
-They will MORE LIKELY have FORMAL JOBS and EARN MORE
VARIATIONS IN CLASS SIZES:
Smaller class sizes:
-SMALLER CLASS SIZES seem to LEAD TO HIGHER ACHIEVEMENT, so class size is CONSIDERED IMPORTANT
-When there are MORE LEARNERS IN A CLASS, it is MORE DIFFICULT for the teacher to PAY ATTENTION to ALL THE LEARNERS’ NEEDS and to MAKE SURE they can KEEP UP WITH THEIR STUDIES
Industrialised countries:
-In MOST INDUSTRIALISED COUNTRIES, a class size of 25 TO 30 is NORMAL IN A STATE SCHOOL; class sizes are SMALLER in PRIVATE SCHOOLS
Developing countries:
-In MANY DEVELOPING COUNTRIES, however, CLASS SIZES are STILL MUCH HIGHER and they may be MORE CHILDREN than CHAIRS and DESKS -According to UNESCO, in 2016, the AVERAGE CLASS SIZE in MALAWI, the CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC and in TANZANIA was MORE THAN 70 LEARNERS in EACH CLASS
-Class sizes are HIGHEST for the YOUNGEST CHILDREN
-Therefore MANY CHILDREN do NOT get a POSITIVE start to THEIR SCHOOL LIVES
NORMS, VALUES AND CULTURAL DIFFERENCES:
-Going to SCHOOL has ONLY BECOME THE NORM around the WORLD FAIRLY RECENTLY
-In SOME FAMILIES and COMMUNITIES, going to school is NOT SEEN AS IMPORTANT
What can this be based on?
-This can be based on PARENT’S EXPERIENCE
-If PARENTS did NOT go to school, they may SEE LITTLE VALUE in their CHILDREN GOING
-OTHER PARENTS around the world, and their CHILDREN, place a HIGH VALUE ON SCHOOL
-MANY PEOPLE view school and QUALIFICATIONS as the ONLY WAY OUT OF POVERTY or LOW STANDARDS OF LIVING they were BORN INTO
ACCESS TO THE INTERNET/DIGITAL RESOURCES:
-GLOBALLY, schools VARY IN TERMS OF THEIR DIGITAL SOURCES -SOME SCHOOLS have COMPUTERS for learners to use, connected to the internet via a HIGH-SPEED INTERNET CONNECTION
-Such RESOURCES can GREATLY IMPROVE EDUCATION, as (1) learners DEVELOP ICT SKILLS; (2) they are also ABLE TO SEARCH FOR INFORMATION related to their studies
-HOWEVER, some schools have LIMITED ACCESS TO COMPUTERS and INTERNET, and some EVEN LACK ELECTRICITY
COVID-19:
-The COVID-19 PANDEMIC affected PEOPLE EVERYWHERE regardless of COUNTRY, INCOME or GENDER
-DURING THE PANDEMIC, many SCHOOLS around the world CLOSED, often for MONTHS AT A TIME
-It was DIFFICULT for LEARNERS TO CONTINUE THEIR STUDIES and there has been a GLOBAL DISCUSSION about the ‘COVID GENERATION’
-PEOPLE are CONCERNED about the ways in which the PANDEMIC affected children and YOUNG PEOPLE, socially AND educationally
-HOWEVER, children with ACCESS TO A GOOD INTERNET CONNECTION at home were ABLE TO CONTINUE STUDYING, at least partly
-MANY SCHOOLS put LESSONS and RESOURCES ONLINE, so that LEARNERS COULD FOLLOW them at HOME
-When EXAMINATION CENTRES had to CLOSE, some examinations were ALSO AVAILABLE ONLINE
-OTHER SCHOOLS did NOT have the DIGITAL CONNECTIONS NECESSARY to provide ONLINE LEARNING
-BECAUSE OF THIS, many children RECEIVED NO EDUCATION during the LOCKDOWNS because they had NO ACCESS TO DIGITAL DEVICES -There is a CLEAR ‘digital divide’ BETWEEN SCHOOLS AND LEARNERS with digital access and those WITHOUT
STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS OF THE DIFFERENT EXPLANATIONS FOR DIFFERENCES IN EDUCATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT:
What we have looked at:
-REMEMBER we have LOOKED AT explanations based on:
(1) SOCIAL CLASS;
(2) ETHNICITY;
(3) GENDER;
(4) Global difference
-These ALL HAVE strengths AND limitations
***ALL THESE FACTORS may have AN IMPACT on SOME CHILDREN in SOME CIRCUMSTANCES
-But there are NO UNIVERSAL EXPLANATIONS which can FULLY EXPLAIN differences in educational ACHIEVEMENT between countries, genders, social classes and ethnic groups
Trying to separate:
-It SHOULD ALSO BE REMEMBERED that SOCIAL CLASS, ETHNICITY and GENDER cannot EASILY BE SEPARATED as factors that AFFECT EDUCATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT
-EACH INDIVIDUAL learner has a GENDER and BELONGS to a SOCIAL CLASS and an ETHNIC GROUP
-So these FACTORS will AFFECT THEIR EXPERIENCE of EDUCATION in different amounts, as well as the COUNTRY THEY LIVE IN
-For INSTANCE:
(a) LOWER ACHIEVING ETHNIC GROUPS are USUALLY those from THE WORKING-CLASS;
(b) GIRLS from WORKING-CLASS BACKGROUNDS do LESS WELL than GIRLS from MIDDLE-CLASS BACKGROUNDS
Social class:
-Social class MAY be the MOST IMPORTANT FACTOR
-SINCE children from POORER BACKGROUNDS and POORER COUNTRIES tend to do LESS WELL and have the LOWEST ACHIEVEMENT LEVELS
-This is REGARDLESS of their GENDER or ETHNICITY
-HOWEVER, all societies ARE DIFFERENT and there are VARIATIONS BETWEEN COUNTRIES