Ethnicity and Educational Achievement – Internal Factors

TEACHER LABELLING AND BOYS:

• African-Caribbean boys labelled as ‘unruly’, ‘disrespectful’ and ‘difficult to control’.

• Gilborn: African-Caribbean pupils more likely to be given detention.

  • Teachers (mis)interpreted dress and manner of speech as representing a challenge to their authority.

  • Often placed in lower streams.

  • Pupils responded in accordance with their labels due to unfair treatment.

• Sewell: many teachers were fearful of Black boys in school, result of socialisation into stereotypical assumptions.

• Jasper: expectations of White female teachers of Black boys’ behaviour dictate the form and style of teaching that they offer them, a style less conducive to learning they show other groups.

• For young Black men with less employment prospects, opposition to schooling still has relevance in highlighting their masculinity and alternative attributes of success.

• Despite relatively high academic self-concept (Strand), educational success is seen as feminine – get respect from credibility of the street.

• Sewell: young Black man wants to be a ‘street hood’.

• Success in classroom marks Black boy out from his peers or classmates and likely to make him target of ridicule or bullying.

• Educational failure becomes badge to wear with pride.

• Aspects have been reflected in concerns about the development of ‘gangsta’ culture and the absence of positive Black role models at home as well as school.

• Current moral panic over gun and knife crime is in part supported by such assertions.

• Similar response in Asian youths – especially Bangladeshi boys, whose economic prospects are bleaker than other Asian groups.

• O’Donnell and Sharpe found other Asian boys were seen as weaklings, conforming to demands of school; or ‘patriarchs’ – loyalty within prescriptions of male-dominated Asian family.

• Connolly: teachers tend to see south Asian boys as immature rather than seriously deviant, much behaviour went unnoticed by teachers and wasn’t punished to same extent as Black boys.

  • South Asian boys had difficulty gaining status as males, made it more difficult for them to enjoy school and feel confident.

  • However, teachers had high expectations of their academic potential and were often praised and encouraged.

SEWELL – BLACK BOYS’ REACTIONS TO THESE LABELS:

• The innovators:

  • Second largest group.

  • Pro-education but anti-school.

  • Valued success; didn’t seek approval of teachers and conformed only as far as school work was concerned.

  • Distanced them from conformists, allowed them to have credibility with rebels and remain positive about educational achievement.

• The conformists:

  • Largest group.

  • Keen to succeed, accepted school goals, had friends from different ethnic groups.

  • Not part of subculture.

  • Anxious to avoid being stereotyped by teacher or peers.

• The retreatists:

  • Tiny minority of isolated individuals who were disconnected from both school and black subcultures.

  • Despised by the rebels.

• The rebels:

  • Most visible and influential group, despite being small minority.

  • Often excluded from school.

  • Rejected both rules and goals of school and expressed opposition through peer group membership – conforming to stereotype of anti-authority, anti-school ‘black macho lad’.

  • Believed in own superiority based on idea black masculinity equates with sexual experience and virility.

  • Contemptuous of white boys seen as effeminate, dismissive of conformist black boys.

TEACHER LABELLING AND GIRLS:

• Connolly studied three classes of 5 to 6 year olds in multi-ethnic, inner city primary schools and found negative stereotypes weren’t confined to boys.

• Black girls were seen as potentially disruptive but likely to be good at sports.

• Teachers in one school tended to underplay the girls’ educational achievements and focus on social behaviour.

• Quite likely to be disciplined and punished even if behaviour didn’t seem to justify it.

• Wright found considerable discrimination in the classroom:

  • Teachers paid Asian pupils, especially girls, less attention.

  • Involved them in less discussion and used simplistic language, assuming they had poor command of English.

  • Lacked sensitivity towards aspects of cultures and displayed open disapproval of customs and traditions.

  • Made little effort to ensure they pronounced names correctly, causes embarrassment and unnecessary ridicule.

  • Made girls feel less positive towards school.

  • Attracted hostility from other pupils – picked up on teachers’ comments and attitudes towards Asian pupils.

  • Teachers still had high expectations of Asian pupils’ academic success.

• Connolly argued south Asian girls, generally successful in education system, may be overlooked due to perceived passivity or may feel marginalised/left out of discussions on intimacy, love & marriage because of stereotypical assumptions of Asian family life.

• Connolly saw behaviour challenged stereotypes and were similar to female peers in terms of work and avoidance of work, obedience and disruption.

  • Seems that success is due in some way to self-fulfilling prophecy of expected success.

• Evidence suggests Black Asian girls are anti-school but pro-education.

  • Resent low teacher expectations and labelling, but more determined to succeed than other groups.

• Fuller and Mirza note how Black girls respond to failure of school to address needs by rejecting teacher help, regarded as patronising, or sometimes misguided.

  • E.g Girls were entered for fewer subjects ‘to take pressure off’ or given ill-informed stereotypical career advice.

  • Girls responded outrightly through dress, attitude and behaviour.

  • Fuller believes strategies adopted enable them to succeed academically and prove teachers wrong.

• Mirza found rejection of teachers’ help and limited involvement in lessons were seen to place them at disadvantage academically, even though they preserved high self-esteem.

  • Weren’t victims of overt racism or labelling; simply held back by well-meaning but misguided behaviour of most teachers.

ETHNIC GROUP IDENTITIES:

• Ideal pupil identity:

  • White, middle class, masculinised identity, with normal sexuality.

  • Seen as achieving in the ‘right’ way, through natural ability and initiative.

• Pathologised pupil identity:

  • Asian ‘deserving poor’, feminised identity, either asexual or with an oppressed sexuality.

  • Seen as plodding conformist and culture-bound ‘overachiever’.

  • Slogger who succeeds through hard work rather than ability.

• Demonised pupil identity:

  • Black or white working class, hyper-sexualised identity.

  • Seen as unintelligent, peer-led, culturally deprived, under-achiever.

EVALUATION:

• Black lives matter campaigns state there’s institutional racism in Britain.

• Racism in school therefore isn’t product of individual teachers.

• A-C economy contributes to racist practices by determining who should be admitted into the school (depending on achievement, gender, ethnicity).

THREE TYPES OF TEACHER:

• Overt racists:

  • Believe blacks are inferior and actively discriminate against them.

• Colour-blind:

  • All pupils are equal but in practice allow racism to go unchallenged.

• Liberal chauvinists:

  • Believe black children are culturally deprived and have low expectations of them.