Ethnic Differences - External (Topic 3)

Cultural Deprivation Theory

A theory that argues certain EMG children lack the ‘cultural equipment’ needed for educational success. Micah Raz (2013) notes that theory was developed in the USA in the 1950s with little research on child development, and has thusly been criticised as a form of victim-blaming. Cultural deprivation theorists would argue that certain components in early socialisation like language differences, attitudes and values, and family structure/parental support directly cause these educational differences.

CD - Language

Bereiter & Engelmann (1966) - Early study claimed that language used by W/C Black American families is inadequate for educational success, in that it is ‘ungrammatical and disjointed’.

CRITICISMS / EVALUATION

Labov (1973) - Found that Black-American speech was perfectly logical.

LINGUISTIC VIOLENCE : April Baker-Bell (2020) - Bereiter & Engelmann’s own views were an example of ‘anti-black linguistic racism’, which labels black speech codes as inferior and white speech codes as superior. Both ways of using language are equally valid, but the school system and wider society is dominated by ‘white mainstream English’. She describes this as ‘linguistic violence’

Attainment 8 scores (2018) - On average, children who’s first language is not English in fact perform slightly better (47 points) than those who only speak English (46 points).

Demie & McLean (2017) - Ranked different reasons for Black Caribbean underachievement- language barriers and literacy were of the less significant compared to internal school-based factors like teachers’ expectations, stereotyping and institutional racism.

CD - Attitudes & Values

Most children are socialised into the mainstream culture which instils aspiration, competitiveness and willingness to make sacrifices that are necessary for long-term goals. Cultural deprivation theorists argue that some EMG pupils are socialised into a subculture that instils a fatalistic attitude that does not value education, leaving them thusly unequipped for educational success.

CRITICISMS / EVALUATION

Platt & Parsons (2018) Using nationally representative large-scale data, among 7-14 year olds, EMG girls and boys had higher career aspirations than that of their white peers, and were more likely to aspire to highly-paid jobs. This disproves the claim that cultural deprivation theory makes that EMG families socialise their children to have low aspirations.

Archer et al (2010) Found that EMG students identified racism rather than low aspirations as a major barrier to achieving their goals.

Parsons found that the achievement gap was particularly large between EMG and White Girls.

CD - Family Structure & Parental Support

Underachievement of Black boys

Family structure

Cultural deprivation theorists also claim that failure to socialise EMG children adequately is due to a dysfunctional family structure.

Moynihan (1965) - Many Black families are headed by a lone parent mother, thus their children are deprived of the care of a male breadwinner. The father’s absence means that boys lack a positive male role model for their achievement. He describes this as a cycle of dysfunction;

Black boys are inadequately socialised into unstable families → go on to fail at school → and then become inadequate parents themselves.

Fathers, gangs and culture

Sewell (2009) - Not a problem of absence of role models, but of fatherly nurturing and ‘tough love’ (firm, fair, respectful and non-abusive discipline) Without this, black boys have it hard to overcome emotional and behavioural difficulties in adolescence.

→ These boys then go onto receive ‘perverse loyalty and love’ from street gangs of other fatherless boys. This presents as a media-inspired role model of ‘anti-school black masculinity’.

—^ Described by Chris Arnot (2004) as the ‘ultra-tough ghetto superstar’, an image constantly reinforced through rap lyrics and MTV videos.

Peer Pressure

Most of the academically ambitious black boys Sewell interviewed described the greatest barrier to educational success as being pressure from other boys, as the fear for example speaking in standard English was looked down upon, and seen as ‘selling out to the white establishment’.

Asian vs. Black pupils in achievement

Black students tend to underperform compared to their Asian peers because of cultural differences in early socialisation and attitudes towards education. ‘‘While one is being nurtured by MTV, the other is clocking up the educational hours.’’

Sewell concludes that black children, specifically the boys, need to have greater expectations placed on them in order to raise their aspirations.

CRITICISMS / EVALUATION

Institutional Racism — Critical Race theorists such as Gillborn (2008) argue that Sewell downplays the effects of racism. It is not peer pressure or absent fathers alone but institutional racism in the education system that systematically puts Black boys at a disadvantage, producing large numbers of underachievement.

Achievement of Asians

Compared to black families, Sewell (2009) finds that Indian and Chinese families benefit from supportive families with an ‘Asian work ethic’ that place high value on education.

Lupton (2004) argues similarly that, adult authority in Asian families is similar to the model that operates in schools. Respectful behaviours towards adults, for example, was expected from children. This has a ‘knock-on effect’ in school, as Asian parents were more likely to be supportive of school behaviour policies.