Internal Factors

Recap so far

Interactionism• Micro-sociology

• Based on the every day interactions between individuals

• Not trying to identify large scale structures

Labeling

• Labelling is attaching a meaning or definition to someone based on a stereotype or on limited knowledge of them.

• Teachers make judgements about the ‘type’ of students they have in their classes and they attach mental labels to them.

Labelling

• Working class children are often UNFAIRLY labelled negatively

Howard Becker (1971)

• Found teachers judge how students fit into their idea of the ‘ideal pupil’.

• Teachers labelled working class children as badly behaved and further from the ‘ideal’

Cicourel and Kitsuse (1963)

• American high schools

• Counsellors were not judging students according to ability but were judging largely on class and race.

• Middle class students more likely to be placed on high level courses.

Ray Rist (1970)

• American Kindergarten

• Pupils labelled as fast learners were seated close to the teacher and given more attention

• The other groups were seated further away, got less attention and less opportunity to demonstrate their ability. (these were more likely to be working class.)

Nell Keddie (1971)• Classes were streamed by ability

• All streams followed same curriculum.

• Top stream were given theoretical, high status knowledge

• Bottom stream given much more descriptive, low status knowledge

Self-fulfilling prophecy

• A self-fulfilling prophecy is a prediction that directly or indirectly causes itself to become true, by the very terms of the prophecy itself, due to positive feedback between belief and behaviour.

Self-fulfilling prophecy

• 3 stages

1. Teacher labels pupil and makes predictions about him/her

2. Teacher treats pupil according to those predictions

3. Expectation becomes internalised and becomes part of his/her self-concept

Rosenthal and Jacobson (1968)

• Pygmalion in the Classroom• Used a test to predict the children who would

make academic progress• Both the test and the predictions were not true• One year later many of the children predicted to

do well, had made significant progress

Rosenthal and Jacobson (1968)

• This study demonstrated the self-fulfilling prophecy

• The predictions the researchers had made had changed the behaviour of the teachers

• They created a nicer environment for the chosen pupils, they gave them more time and attention, they called on them for answers more often and they gave them more detailed feedback when they got something wrong

Self-fulfilling prophecy

• Self fulfilling prophecies can have negative as well as positive effects

• And as we have seen working class students are often negatively labelled this may account for some of the inequality of outcome

Streaming• Streaming - splitting year groups into several

hierarchical groups that stay together for all lessons

• Setting – Putting groups of similar ability together just for certain lessons

• Mixed ability – the practise of teaching all levels together began in comprehensive schools

Streaming• Studies show that self-fulfilling prophecy is

particularly likely to occur when children are streamed

Streaming• Once placed in a particular stream or set it is very

difficult to get moved

• Children in lower streams internalise the idea that they will not achieve much

• This creates a self-fulfilling prophecy

Douglas

• Children placed in the lower stream at the age of 8 had suffered a decline in IQ by the age of 11

• Children placed in a higher stream at the age of 8 had improved their IQ by the age of 11

Pupil Subcultures

• A subculture is a group of people who share norms, values and beliefs about something, usually in opposition to the wider society

• Pupil subcultures often emerge in response to the ways in which students are labelled or streamed.

Lacey (1970)

• Uses concepts of DIFERENTIATION and POLARISATION to explain pupil subcultures

• Differentiation- process of categorisation eg. Streaming

• Polarisation – Pupils respond to streaming by moving towards opposite extremes

Pro-school Subculture

• Committed to the values of the school

• Gain status through academic success

• Values are those of the school

• High stream pupils

Anti-school Subculture• Low self-esteem leads to different ways of

gaining status• Rejects the system• Gain status through: Drinking, smoking,

stealing, truanting, being cheeky to teachers

• Becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy of failure

Hargreaves (1967)• Similar response to streaming as Lacey but in a

very different school.

• Pupils formed a group in which status could be gained from rebelling against school rules.

• Delinquent subculture helped guarantee their educational failure.

Stephen Ball (1981)

• When Beachside school abolished streaming the anti-school subculture started to disappear

• Teachers still labelled pupils though• Middle class pupils were still more often

categorised as cooperative and able.• Class inequality continues even where streaming

and subcultures don’t

Criticisms• Labelling theory could be accused of

determinism. Children who are labelled almost have no choice but to fail, but this is not true.

• Marxists criticise the lack of focus on structures. This theory seems to blame individual teachers for the labelling rather than the system.