A LEVEL SOCIOLOGY

AL Paper 1: Education with Theory & Methods

Topic: EDUCATION

Booklet 3: Ethnicity & Differential Educational Attainment

ETHNICITY & DIFFERENTIAL EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

THE DATA1. DfES 2014 – 78% of Indian students achieve 5 A*- C at GCSE compared to 60%

for White and over 50% for Black Caribbean pupils.

2. DfES 2013 – 24% of Chinese achieved 3 A-A* at A level compared to 10.6% for White and 11.2% for Asian students. Only 4.9% of black students gained 3 top grades.

Look at Chart 2 and answer the following questions:

1. Which ethnic group achieved the highest number of A*-C, including maths and English in 2012?

2. Which ethnic group achieved the lowest number of A*-C, including maths and English in 2012?

3. What reasons can you think of for this?

4. What is the trend in achievement from 2007/08 to 2011/12 for all ethnic groups?

This booklet is split into the following sections: External Factors and Achievement Internal Factors 1: Labelling, Identities and Subculture Internal Factors 2: Institutional RacismEXTERNAL or OUTSIDE-SCHOOL FACTORS

Many sociologists argue that ethnic differences in achievement can best be explained by looking at factors outside the school - in the HOME, FAMILY and CULTURE of the child and the impact of wider society. The main explanations of this kind are:

1. CULTURAL DEPRIVATIONDefinition: The term ‘cultural deprivation’ refers to the lacking of the correct norms and values necessary for educational success.

As with explanations of class differences in achievement, cultural deprivation theory sees the under-achievement of some ethnic groups as the result of inadequate socialisation in the home. The explanation has three main aspects:

A) Language and Intellectual SkillsB) Attitudes and ValuesC) Family Structure and Parental Support

A) Language & intellectual skills Cultural deprivation theorists see the lack of intellectual and linguistic skills as a major cause of under-achievement for many ethnic minority children. They argue that many children from low-income black families lack intellectual stimulation and enriching experiences. This leaves them ill-equipped for school because they have not been able to develop reasoning and problem- solving skills.

Bereiter and Engleman consider the language spoken by low- income black American families as inadequate for educational success. They see it as ungrammatical, disjointed and incapable of expressing abstract ideas. Is this relevant in the UK?

‘Sup homie?

There has also been concern that children who do not speak English at home may be held back educationally. However, Gillborn and Mirza (2000) note that Indian students do very well despite not having English as their home language.

How is this familiar to speech codes and social class? Which old friend can we refer to here?

B) Attitudes and values Cultural deprivation theorists see lack of motivation as a major cause of the failure of many black children. Most other children are socialised into mainstream culture, which instils ambition, competitiveness and willingness to make the sacrifices necessary to achieve long-term goals. The term for this is _________________________________. This equips them for success in education. By contrast, it is argued, some black children are socialised into a subculture that instils a fatalistic, 'live for today' attitude that does not value education and leaves them ill-equipped for success.

How is this similar to attitudes & values and social class? Which old friend can we refer to here?

Ruth Lupton (2004) argues that obedience to adult authority in Asian families is similar to that expected in schools. Her study of family life showed a culture of parental respect in British-Asian families and this had a knock-on effect in school, since parents were more likely to be supportive of school-behaviour policies. The culture of British-Asian family life could therefore be said to be an advantage in terms of grades.

C) Family Structure Cultural deprivation theorists suggest that the socialisation of children, either adequately or inadequately, is the result of family structure.

i) Black Caribbean familiesMoynihan’s research in 1965 showed that many black families were headed by a lone mother, meaning that children are deprived of adequate care because she has to struggle financially in the absence of a male breadwinner. His absence also means that boys lack an adequate role model of male achievement. Moynihan sees cultural deprivation as a vicious circle, where inadequately socialised children from unstable families go on to fail at school and become inadequate parents themselves.

Pryce’s research in 1979 reinforced this criticism of many black families. He claimed that family life among many black pupils in Bristol was 'turbulent', with inadequate cultural values, poor encouragement and a high rate of absent fathersAs a result, many black pupils have low self-esteem and under-achieve.

Is research from 1965 and 1979 still relevant? It would appear so. In a television documentary in 2004 Trevor Phillips, the Chair of the Commission for Racial Equality made the same criticisms of many black families as Moynihan and Pryce in earlier decades. A crucial factor in the underachievement of many black boys is, he argues, the high incidence of absent fathers, especially in the poorest sections of the black community.

Where’s Dad?

ii) Asian familiesDivorce and separation among British-Asian families continues to be much lower than the national average. Rates of absent fathers are consequently very low.

However, not all Asian groups have a high level of achievement. Whilst Chinese and Indian students do very well, Pakistani and Bangladeshi students achieve pass-rates below the national average. Therefore, the cultural disadvantage of absent fathers cannot be applied to their underachievement. Other sociological factors must therefore be explored.

EVALUATION OF CULTURAL DEPRIVATION & ETHNICITYKeddie sees cultural deprivation as a victim-blaming explanation. She argues that ethnic minority children are culturally ________________________, not culturally _______________________. They underachieve because schools are ethnocentric: biased in favour of white (m/c) culture and against minorities. A solution lies in providing multicultural education: a policy that recognises and values minority cultures and includes them in the curriculum.Driver (1977) argues, far from being dysfunctional, black Caribbean families provides girls with positive female role models, which could explain why girls tend to be more successful than boysAdditionally, cultural deprivation theorists only look at the ‘big picture’ (macro) and fail to acknowledge that there will be many children with black, Pakistani and Bangladeshi culture who succeed.

Many black pupils fail because they’re having a…L

A

F2.MATERIAL DEPRIVATIONDefinition: The term 'material deprivation' to refer to poverty and a lack of economic necessities necessary for educational success.

Some sociologists argue that material deprivation rather than cultural deprivation is the main cause of under-achievement among ethnic minority children. Recap: Outline and briefly explain the three material factors that can impact educational achievement. Don’t forget to use those authors!

What’s material deprivation got to do with ethnicity?Material deprivation theorists see educational failure as resulting from factors such as substandard housing and low income. Ethnic minorities are more likely to face these problems. For example:

Almost half of all ethnic minority children live in low-income households, compared to a quarter of white children.

Ethnic minorities are almost twice as likely to be unemployed compared to whites Ethnic minority households are around three times as likely to be homeless.

These inequalities parallel those seen in educational achievement. For example, on average Indians & Chinese have a higher social class position than blacks, Bangladeshis and Pakistanis, who often face high levels of poverty.

The material deprivation explanation argues that such class differences explain why black, Bangladeshi and Pakistani pupils tend to do worse than Indian & Chinese pupils.

EVALUATION OF MATERIAL DEPRIVATION & ETHNICITY

The idea that social class rather than ethnicity is the central cause of underachievement is supported by the fact that a middle-class black male is more likely to achieve than a working-class Indian male.

Additionally, we must not forget about the white ethic group. White working-class males are now the group who are now most at risk at underperforming, yet are often hidden within the statistics for whites overall. This also demonstrates how social-class the most significant factor.

As previously seen in booklet 2, schools and the government have put policies in place in an attempt to combat the impact of material deprivation, such as free school meals, bursaries and offering free access to computers and libraries. Despite this, some ethnic groups continue to underachieve, indicating it is cultural factors that are more significant than material factors in explaining underachievement.

Gender must also be taken into account, as girls from all ethnic backgrounds achieve higher results than their male peers.

Finally, just like cultural deprivation theorists, material deprivation theorists only focus on the ‘big picture’ and fail to acknowledge there are many children who succeed in the education system despite experiencing material deprivation and being from an ethnic minority background.

3 RACISM IN WIDER SOCIETYWhile material deprivation has an impact on the educational achievement of many ethnic minority children, some sociologists argue that deprivation is itself the product of another factor - namely, racism.

i) Mason – Racial discriminationAs Mason puts it, 'discrimination is a continuing and persistent feature of the experience of Britain's citizens of minority ethnic origin'.

In housing, for instance, discrimination means that minorities are more likely to be forced into substandard accommodation than white people of the same class. In employment, too, there is evidence of direct and deliberate discrimination.

ii) Noon – Racism & EmploymentFor example, Noon (1993) sent matching letters of enquiry about future employment opportunities to the top 100 UK companies, signed by fictitious applicants called 'Evans' and 'Patel' with the same qualifications and experience. In terms of both the number and helpfulness of replies, the companies were more encouraging to the 'white' candidate.

This helps to explain why members of ethnic minorities are more likely to face unemployment and low pay, and this in turn has a negative effect on their children's educational prospects through material deprivation. A vicious cycle of underachievement continues…..cultural deprivation, material deprivation, and deprived of equal opportunities due to prejudice.

EVALUATION OF RACISM IN WIDER SOCIETY

Look at Noon’s study… When was it carried out?If this study was carried out again today, do you think the findings would be the same? Explain your answer.

Just saying racism in wider society is the cause of underachievement is too simplistic. Sociologists would say ‘reductionist’, as it attempts to explain something very complex in a very simple way. There are many factors that contribute to the differences in achievement as we have already seen in this booklet.

Finally, both Noon’s and Mason’s arguments are flawed, because all ethnic minorities surely experience racism, however not all ethnic minorities underachieve. Which ethnic minority groups tend to overachieve, rather than underachieve?

Question Time:Let’s evaluate: Think about the three external factors arguments (cultural deprivation, material deprivation & racism in wider society and rank them in order of which you think is the most important in explaining differences in achievement by ethnicity. Explain your reasoning.

1.

2.

3.

Explanation:

INTERNAL or INSIDE-SCHOOL FACTORS (1)

While external factors may play an important part in creating differences in achievement between ethnic groups, interactionists argue factors internal to the education system itself are, of course, also important. These internal factors include:

1. Labelling and Teacher RacismInteractionist studies have shown that teachers often see black and Asian pupils as being far from the 'ideal pupil'. For example, black pupils are often seen as disruptive and Asians as passive (unassertive & obedient). These labels may lead teachers to treat ethnic minority pupils differently, which can lead to a ___________-________________ ____________________.

Black Students Gillborn & Youdell (2000) found that teachers were quick to discipline black students than others for the same behaviour.

Gillborn & Youdell argue this is a result of ‘racialised expectations’. They found teachers expected black students to present ore discipline problems and often misinterpreted their behaviour as threatening or a challenge to authority. When teachers acted on this misperception, the pupils responded negatively and further conflict ensued. In turn, black pupils felt teachers underestimated their ability and picked on them.

This may explain why exclusion rates for black pupils are three times those for white pupils, as schools tend to see black boys as a threat and label them negatively.

South Asian students Cecile Wright's (1992) study of a multi-ethnic primary school shows that Asian pupils can also be the victims of teachers' labelling. She found that despite the school's apparent commitment to equal opportunities, teachers held ethnocentric views: that is, they took for granted that British culture and Standard English were superior. This affected how they related to Asian pupils. For example, teachers assumed they would have a poor grasp of English and left them out of class discussions or used simplistic, childish language when speaking to them.

Asian pupils also felt isolated when teachers expressed disapproval of their customs or failed to pronounce their names properly. In general, teachers saw them not as a threat (unlike black pupils), but as a problem they could ignore. The effect was that Asian pupils, especially the girls, were marginalised - pushed to the edges and prevented from participating fully.

Chinese Students Archer (2008) argues that even those minority students that perform successfully can be seen as ‘abnormal’ by their teachers. While successful, Chinese students were seen as having achieved

success in the ‘wrong’ way – through hard work and conforming rather than through natural ability. This meant they could never legitimately occupy the identity of ‘ideal pupil’, despite being viewed as a model minority.

Definition: The term ‘model minority’ refers to a minority group (whether based on ethnicity, race or religion) whose members are most often perceived to achieve a higher degree of success than the population average, for example in terms of educational success.

Teachers – a bunch of racists! True?

2. Setting and StreamingDefinition: The term ‘setting’ refers to students being placed in a particular class for a particular subject based on perceived ability.The term ‘streaming’ refers to students being placed in a band or ‘stream’ based on perceived ability for the teaching of the whole curriculum, rather than specific subjects. This is more common in the American system.

i) Gillborn & YoudellAs we have seen previously, Gillborn and Youdell found that in the ‘A-C economy’, teachers focus on those students who they believe are most likely to achieve grade C at GCSE – a process called ‘educational triage’ or sorting. As a result, negative stereotypes about black pupils’ ability that some teachers hold means they are more likely to be placed in lower sets or streams.

ii) FosterFoster (1990) found that teachers' stereotypes of black pupils as badly behaved could result in them being placed in lower sets than other pupils of similar ability. Streaming black pupils on the basis of negative stereotypes about their ability or behavior can lead to a self-fulfilling prophecyunderachievement.

3. Pupil Responses & SubculturesInteractionists argue that once a person is labelled their response to that label leads to a self-fulfilling prophecy.One way this occurs, it is argued, is through students joining a subculture.

Recap: What is meant by the term subculture?

What are the two main types of subculture students may join as a result of labelling?

What is the name of the interactionist author who put forward this idea? (Look at your shoes if you’ve forgotten)

However, research into the responses to labelling of some ethnic minority students shows that pupils can respond in a variety of ways . Labels therefore do not automatically turn into self-fulfilling prophecies.

Fuller: Rejecting negative labelsMary Fuller's (1984) study of a group of black girls in Year 11 of a London comprehensive school provides a good example of pupils responding by rejecting negative labels. The girls were untypical because they were high achievers in a school where most black girls were placed in low streams.

Fuller describes how instead of accepting negative stereotypes of themselves, the girls channelled their anger about being negatively labelled into the pursuit of educational success. However, unlike other ‘bright’ pupils they did not seek the approval of teachers, many of whom they regarded as racist. They conformed only as far as the schoolwork itself was concerned. They worked hard, but gave the appearance of not doing so, showing a deliberate lack of concern about school routines. They had a positive attitude to academic success but not to the school itself, refusing to join any sports or drama clubs. They respected themselves, but not the school or its teachers. There was no self-fulfilling prophecy!

ii) Sewell: The variety of boys’ responsesTony Sewell (1998) examines the responses and strategies black pupils adopt to cope with racism. In his study of a boys' secondary school with a large number of black students, he found that many teachers had a stereotype of 'black machismo', which sees all black boys as rebellious, anti-authority and anti-school, even though only a minority fitted this stereotype. One effect of this stereotyping is that black boys are more likely to be excluded from school. Sewell identifies different ways in which the boys respond to racist stereotyping.

Two ways of responding:

Sewell shows that only a small minority fit the stereotype of the 'black macho lad'. Nevertheless, teachers tend to see them all in this way and this contributes to the under-achievement of many boys as they are more likely to be told off or placed in lower sets.

In addition to teacher stereotyping, however, Sewell recognises that other factors also contribute to the under-achievement of black boys. These include low aspirations and the absence of fathers as role models in some black families. He also blames a media inspired role model of anti-school black masculinity.

Black pupils – a bunch of hopeless rebels! True?

The ConformistsThe conformists were the largest group. These boys were keen to succeed and accepted the school's goals. They were not part of a subculture and were anxious to avoid being stereotyped either by teachers or their peers. They regarded themselves as ‘pupils’ rather

The RebelsThe rebels were the most visible and influential group, but were only a small minority of pupils. They were often excluded from school, and rejected both the goals and the rules of the school. They expressed their opposition through peer group membership, conforming to the stereotype of the ‘black macho lad’.

‘Take that’ negative label!

Black pupils – once labelled, they’re doomed! True?

EVALUATION OF LABELLING, SETTING & SUBCULTUREThere is a danger of seeing black underachievement as simply the product of individual teachers' prejudices, which is far too simplistic. We need to look at the bigger picture to understand where these stereotypes come from in the first place that impact teachers perceptions, as well as other factors that impact the underachievement of particular groups, such as social class and gender. Not all teachers hold racist stereotypes. Many teachers will be aware of the barriers to success that some ethnic minority children race, and attempt to work with them, rather than against them. Also, there are ethnic minority teachers however their numbers are relatively low. In 2012 1.8% of teachers were of black-Caribbean ethnicity. In many schools it is likely that more black people are employed as cleaners than teachers!There is also a danger of assuming that, once labelled, pupils automatically fall victim to the self-fulfilling prophecy and fail. The studies by Fuller and Sewell reveal a more complex picture. ‘All teachers are racists and all ethnic minority pupils are victims of their relentless negative labelling’ are the words of a simple-minded sociology student. Don’t let it be you! Finally, as we will see in the next section, it is not the labelling of individual teachers that is the problem (micro), but the biased way the education system as a whole is organized and operates (macro).

Let’s evaluate: Which social factor, class or ethnicity, do you think is most important when it comes to labelling, setting & streaming and joining an anti-school subculture? Explain your answer.

INTERNAL or INSIDE-SCHOOL FACTORS (2)

Troyna & Williams argue that explanations of ethnic differences in achievement need to go beyond an understanding of the effects of individual teacher racism and look at how schools and colleges routinely discriminate against ethnic minorities. They therefore make a distinction between:

individual racism that results from the prejudiced views of individuals, such as teachers. institutional racism - discrimination that is built into the way schools and colleges operate.

Definition: The term ‘institutional racism’ refers to the practices of an institution or organisation that are biased towards, or discriminates against a particular ethnic or cultural group.

It is institutional racism that they argue has a more significant impact on the achievement of some ethnic minority students. They therefore argue it’s not the racism of teachers, it’s the racism of the whole school. According to There are three key ways the education system is organized so as to disadvantage ethnic minority students; the ethnocentric curriculum, assessment practices & selection policies.

1. The Ethnocentric Curriculum Definition: The term ‘ethnocentric’ describes an attitude or policy that gives priority to the culture and viewpoint of one particular ethnic group while disregarding others.

Troyna & Williams describe the curriculum in British schools as ethnocentric because it gives priority to white culture and the English language., while largely ignoring non-European languages, literature and music. From this point of view, the ethnocentric curriculum is a prime example of institutional racism.

i) Languages, literature and musicThe meagre provision for teaching Asian languages is seen as an example of institutional racism because it is an example of racial bias being built into schools and colleges. The National Curriculum can be seen a ‘specifically British’ because it largely ignores non-European languages, literature and music. Troyna referred to the attempt at a multicultural curriculum as being little more than 'saris, steel drums and samosas'.

ii) HistoryThis argument has been supported by Ball (1994), who studied of the History curriculum and found the history of black and Asian peoples was still being largely ignored, instead promoting an attitude of ‘glorious little Englandism’. This can contribute to black and Asian pupils’ underachievement, as they feel their learning has no relevance to their heritage.

Despite such critical research over the years, it is not clear what impact the ethnocentric curriculum has. For example, while it may ignore Asian culture, Indian and Chinese pupils' achievement is above the national average, so it does not appear to have affected them!

The ethnocentric curriculum and you. How far do your experiences support Troyna & Williams' view?

British schools teaching British stuff! What’s the big deal?

‘An ethnocentric curriculum cannot be the main reason for underachievement.’ Explain….

2. Assessment Practices Gillborn (2008) argues that ‘the assessment game’ is rigged so as to maintain the dominant culture’s superiority ie, white culture. Not only is the curriculum

content biased towards the success of white students in assessments, but the way assessments are carried out benefits them too.

The way schools are organised means that a (usually white) teacher’s judgement about a pupil determines the opportunities that are available to that student. For example, as we saw previously, black students are more likely to be placed in lower sets. This means they will not have access to the higher-tier exam, and their grade will be limited to a ‘C’. Similarly, they may not be recommended for the ‘Gifted and Talented’ programme, where whites are twice as likely to be identified. In short, assessment practices are not free from bias and therefore allow for racially biased views to impact achievement.

It is argued therefore that the assessment strategies are institutionally racist, as they rely on teacher judgements. If schools were organised so all students took the same tests, exams and classes then any teacher bias could not impact achievement.

3. Selection Policies Another way the education system can be seen to be institutionally racist is the way schools are now able to select pupils. Since the introduction of marketisation policies in the 1980s, schools, particularly good ones, have had more scope to select pupils. These procedures, it is argued, favour white pupils and disadvantage those from ethnic minority backgrounds, because some ethnic minority students are perceived, due to the statistics, to be of lower ability and would thus negatively impact the schools league table position. This then leads to an ethnically stratified education system

The Commission for Racial Equality (1993) found that although school admissions procedures provide parents with more freedom to ‘shop around’ for the best school in the area, since ethnic minority families face greater levels of material deprivation, they are less likely to live in the catchment area of a ‘desirable, middle-class school’. Nor are they likely to possess the wealth required to move to such a catchment area. Ethnic minority pupils are therefore more likely to attend unpopular schools with average grades below national standards.

EVALUATION OF INSTITUTIONAL RACISMSociologists such as Sewell reject the idea that institutional racism is powerful enough to prevent individuals from succeeding. In his view, external factors are more important.Other critics of institutional racism point out, that whist there is underachievement of black boys, there is also the ‘overachievement’ of Indian and Chinese pupils. If these two groups do well, then the power of institutional racism can be questioned.Finally, some of these studies are massively outdated. There has been huge improvements to address equality & diversity issues in schools in more recent years.

FINAL POINT - THE ISSUE OF CATEGORISATION Although the category of ‘ethnic minority’ is useful for sociologists in analysing educational achievement in Britain, it has attracted some criticism. For example the term ‘Asian pupil’ crudely lumps a variety of pupils from different cultural, ethnic and social-class backgrounds. Nor can we speak of Asian pupils underachieving, since those from Chinese and Indian backgrounds achieve higher than the national average, while Pakistani and Bangladeshi pupils tend to underachieve. A more significant factor influencing this diversity of performance is surely social class.

Don’t

Another important distinction within ethnic minority pupils is gender. A good example to illustrate this is the relative success of working-class black girls and the underachievement of large numbers of black boys from the same class background. Clearly, any attempt to explain the attitudes, experience and attainment of any pupil in Britain must consider the complex mix of gender, ethnicity and, perhaps most importantly, social class.

EXAM FOCUS Below are a list of example questions you may get asked in the exam, based on this booklet. The key skills are in bold:

Item A There are marked ethnic differences in educational achievement. Some minority ethnic groups do much better than others. For example, Indian pupils on average achieve more highly than Pakistanis and Bangladeshis. These differences may be due to factors outside the school. For example, some sociologists suggest that cultural differences have an important influence on achievement. Others claim that it is more to do with material circumstances on different ethnic groups.

Item BThere are important differences in the experiences of different ethnic groups in the education system, for example in terms of examination entries and allocation to sets and streams. Similarly, studies show that teachers may be quicker to discipline pupils from certain ethnic groups for apparent misbehaviour. These differences can lead to educational failure for some groups.

A LEVEL QUESTIONS

: Outline TWO ways in which the ethnocentric curriculum may operate in the education system. (4)

Q2: Outline THREE ways a student’s culture may impact educational achievement by ethnicity. (6)

Q3: Applying material from Item A, analyse TWO ways ethnic differences in education are a result of factors outside school. (10)

Q4: Applying material from Item B and your own knowledge, evaluate the view that ethnic differences in educational achievement are primarily the result of processes within schools. (30 marks)

EXAM GUIDANCE

Q1 & Q2 are short questions and you do not need to include authors/studies/perspectives for full marks.Do not spend too long on these questions. ‘Get in, get out’!

Q3 should include the following for full marks: Brief introduction defining any key concepts in the question and/or identifying the

relevant perspective/theory. TWO detailed points that directly address the question. Each making reference to

relevant authors/studies/evidence/theory. At least one application of material from the item. Brief conclusion that analyses/evaluates the overall information, ie, which point is

the most significant/convincing and/or evidence that undermines the arguments

overall. 10 marks = 15 mins = 1 ½ sides of writing.

Q4 should include the following for full marks: Introduction defining any key concepts in the question and outlining the debate

you are going to consider in the essay. At least FOUR detailed points that directly address the question. Each making

reference to relevant authors/studies/evidence/theory. EVALUATION – There must be alternate arguments and criticisms presented for

any chance of higher marks. This is the key skill you are being assessed on. At least one application of material from the item. Conclusion that analyses/evaluates the overall information, ie, which argument is

the most significant/convincing and/or evidence that undermines the arguments overall.

30 marks = 45 mins = At least 4 sides of writing.