Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Differential Achievement In Education - Coggle Diagram
Differential Achievement In Education
Social Class
clear achievement gap between those eligible for free school meals and those not
in 2014/15 60% of students not eligible got 5 GCSEs A*-C VS 33% who are eligible
In school factors
Labelling theory: working class students more likely to be labelled negatively, self-fulfilling prophecy
teachers can deny they do this and it is subconscious
Bauman and Maffesoli see subcultures as result of cultural identity rather than labels
anti-school subcultures: Paul Willis' study of the lads, working class boys more likely to join anti school subculture as they see school for middle class kids.
does not explain why working class boys are more likely to join anti-school subcultures
elaborate language code used by middle class children is also used by teachers, exams, examiners etc. Working class children use restricted language code. Actually assessing extent of language code rather than intelligence.
can be both in school and out school as relates to how people speak out of school too
Out of school factors
intelligence inherited genetically so middle class parents who are more intelligent pass this on to their children.
Jensen argued that 80%of intelligence was genetics
identical twins brought up in different environments had similar IQs
Douglas (1964) showed middle class student more likely to pass11+ than working class student (both of average intelligence)
Material factors
material deprivation can lead to poor diet and malnourished children which leads to poor health = harder to concentrate and more likely to miss school. Books, internet access, quiet place to work also count
government cannot stop middle class parents from getting tutoring, buying extra books etc.
working class children more likely to have jobs outside of school = less time to revise + do homework, more tired
government policies put in place to help issues e.g free school meals, pupil premium, to support children but statistics still show social class effects achievement the most
Cultural factors
cultural deprivation
Sure start and other policies put in place to help bridge gap
norms and values of working class families different to those that create success in education
working class students expect immediate gratification whereas middle class expect deferred gratification - Sugarman and Hyman argued that working class families less interested in social mobility thus not as interested in getting higher qualifications for higher paying jobs
Parents push them less because less interested in education
Bourdieu's idea of habitus - middle class students and teachers share same habitus so get along better. Middle class hhave more cultural capital, so have advantage as their behaviours and attitudes are better rewarded and more useful in education system
Gender
9% more girls got GCSEs A
-C, they also get more A
s and As
Boys then outperform girls at A-Level but this is misleading because 10% more girls sit A-levels so there is larger chance of underperforming
underachieving boys are more likely to go to apprenticeships/vocational courses so removed from sample
Save the Children (2016) Boys are nearly twice as likely to fall behind before school even begins
middle class boys outperform working class girls which shows social class effects gender
Out of school factors
more girls in education and higher paying positions showing that there is a role model for girls to strive for academic achievement, thus causing them to perform better
still gender pay gap and women do more housework then men
Boys in 1950s + 60s outperformed girls despite their jobs needing less qualifications than they do now so the idea of having role models may not work for everyone as not working for boys
feminist movement brought change in women's role in society: popular culture, media causing shift in career advice for girls
Sue Sharpe: 'Just Like a Girl' study (1994)
Interviews and questionnaires in 1970s and then repeated in 90s with working class girls from London
study to show how society constrained women and their aspirations
in 70s, girls put careers and jobs at bottom, marriage, family and love at top. This changed (gender quake) in 90s where girls put career and job at top
however, because girls were working class it was unlikely that their aspirations in the 90s were going to happen
HOWEVER, there is still gender pay gap etc. and whilst women are becoming more ambitious and changing their priorities, there is still inequality in the world so does not fully explain why girls outperform boys
Fiona Norman: girls more likely to be encouraged to do quiet activities and boys have attitude of boys will be boys
In school factors
girls improve faster than boys rather than boys underperforming
they mature physically faster so arguably mentally + linguistically too
Feminists argue this is just due to stereotypes and girls being encouraged to read stories and be more quiet from young age
Sewell (2006) 'feminisation of education'. Idea that mostly roles in education are associated with females e.g reading: mothers, teachers so the education system is more suited to girls because teachers are girls e.g high levels of coursework
now there is very little coursework and girls still beating boys
Initiatives to support girls e.g GIST (Girls Into Science and Tech)
however still very small minority of females in this more male dominated fields e.g maths, science
Girls often labelled positively and boys negatively: Swann and Graddol argued that teachers spend more time on discipline with boys and education with girls
feminists would argue that boys will be boys attitude means they get away with more
Ethnicity
Black pupils statistically underperform whilst Chinese and Indian overperform
74% of Chinese students got 5 A*s-Cs at GCSEs, 73% Indian, 56% White British, 51.6% Pakistani, 47% African Caribbean
Out of school factors
Archer and Francis showed that Chinese families in the Uk have strong focus on educational success. Close knit families in Asian communities lead to high expectations from parents
close knit families exist in Bangladeshi + Pakistani families too yet they underperform, suggest other factors at play
Bangladeshi and Pakistani and African Caribbean students more likely to have FSM than Indian and Chinese: shows social class has role
Divorce and single parenthood more common in African Caribbean families. Higher chance of material deprivation and lack of male figure
However, strong independent women can be a good role model especially for black girls. Policies in place to help with material deprivation
In school factors
curriculum is ethnocentric e.g white + european history and literature, german, spanish taught, assemblies and holidays are Christian
White British students statistically are not performing best despite education system meant to suit them best, no reason why Chinese + Indian students are top
Racism: individual teachers, stereotypes causing labelling, institutional racism
Gilborn found racial stereotypes led to teachers having high expectations of Chinese, Indian pupils and Asian girls, leading to self-fulfilling prophecy of success
Negative labelling found too, 'Myth of the black challenge' led to self-fulfilling prophecy of failure
Wright thinks school is institutionally racist, discriminatory unintentionally e.g uniforms
Heidi Safia Mirza study: Young Black and Female 1992
used lots of research methods, questionairres, observations, interviews (more valid)
about experience of three black girls in London schools
3 girls did better than white pupils and black boys
evidence of teacher labelling and racism but no evidence in harming their self esteem, actually had high self esteem = self-refuting prophecy
Had formed a pro-education subculture but were against school itself as an institution