1. Ethnic differences in achievement
INTERNAL FACTORS

2. What are the patterns?

3. INTERNAL FACTORS Part 1 Labelling and racism Responses and subcultures
Pupil identities
Part 2
Institutional racism (Ethnocentric curriculum, Selection and segregation)

4. To get you thinking…
Black Caribbean boys start school on a par with their white counterparts. By age 11 they fall behind. By 16 they are one of the lowest-performing gender/ethnic groups.

5. 1. Labelling and teacher racism
Interactionist studies show that teachers often see black (disruptive) and Asians pupils (passive) as being far from the ‘ideal pupil’
Gillborn and Youdell (2000)- teachers quicker to discipline black students than others for the same behaviour.
Concluded that conflict between white teachers and black pupils stem from racial stereotypes.
Foster (1990)- teacher stereotypes of black students can result in them being placed in lower sets.
Self-fulfilling prophecy
Key word!
Racialised expectations: teacher’s expectations of ethnic minority pupils

6. How does this impact achievement?
“Asian girls seemed invisible to the teachers. They received less attention than other students and teachers sometimes expressed open disapproval of their customs and traditions”
How does this impact achievement?
Wright (1992) teachers held ethnocentric views: taken for granted that British culture and Standard English were superior.
Teachers assumed that Asian pupils had a poor grasp of English, they were not included in class discussion and simplistic language was used when speaking to them.

7. 2. Pupil identities
Archer (2008)- teachers discourse constructs three different identities:
Ideal pupil identity: white, m/c, masculine with ‘normal sexuality’. Seen as achieving in the right way through ability and initiative.
Pathologised pupil identity: Asian, feminised, asexual or oppressed sexuality, culture-bound over achiever who succeeds through hard work rather than ability.
Demonised pupil identity: black or white w/c, hyper-sexualised identity, seen as unintelligent, peer led and culturally deprived.
Chinese pupils:
Successful students can also be pathologised e.g. chinese students both praised and viewed negatively by teachers who see them as a quite, passive, repressed and effeminate.
Success achieved in the wrong way (hard work rather than natural ability)
Achievement of ethnic minorities seen as overachievement because achievement is the natural preserve of the white, m/c, ideal pupil.

8. 3. Pupil responses and subcultures
Fuller (1984): black girls in year 11 of a comprehensive school. Rejected labels and channelled their anger in to educational success. They worked hard, but gave the appearance that they were not. They did not seek approval of teachers and relied on their own efforts.
Mac an Ghaill (1992): study of Asian A level students. They did not accept their labels. Rather they developed ‘survival strategies’ e.g. helping one another with work.
Labelling does not necessarily create a self-fulfilling prophecy, some students overcome these barriers!

9. Failed strategies for avoiding racism
Mirza (1992): Young, Female and Black studied ambitious black girls who faced racism.
Girls were held back by the misguided behaviour of most of the teachers, and in particular the power the teachers could exercise over them.
Three types of teacher racism:
The colour blind
The liberal chauvinists
The overt racists
Myth of underachievement: educational achievements of black women are underestimated. When asked whom they most admired, 48% of black girls named themselves and over half named somebody who was black.

10. Sewell: variety of boys’ responses
Sewell (1998): teachers stereotype black boys. He identifies four ways that the boys responded to racist stereotypes:
Rebels
Conformists
Retreatists
Innovators
Only a small minority of boys fit the ‘black macho lad’ however teachers see them in this way and it contributes to the underachievement of many boys.

11. PART 2 - Internal factors- Institutional racism
Institutional racism: discrimination that is built into the way that institutions such as schools and colleges operate.
Hatcher (1996): school governors gave low priority to race issues and failed to deal with pupils racist behaviour.
Institutional racism may allow for ethnic minorities to be disadvantaged by a system that does not prioritise their needs.

12. Critical race theory
Racism is an ingrained feature of society (not just individual but institutional)
Locked-in inequality- historical discrimination is so large there no longer needs to be a conscious attempt to discriminate, the inequality is self- perpetuating.
Gillborn (2008)- sees ethnic inequality as deeply rooted that it is an inevitable feature of the education system.
CRT sees the education system as institutionally racist in the following ways…

13. 1. Marketisation and segregation
Gilborn (1997): school selection allows them to choose pupils placing ethnic minorities at a disadvantage.
The Commission for Racial Equality (1993): racism in school admissions:
Racist bias in interviews for school places
Limited information in minority languages
Ethnic minority parents may have little knowledge on how the admissions system works.

14. 2. The ethnocentric curriculum
an attitude or policy that gives priority to the culture of one particular ethnic group whilst disregarding others.
Troyna and Williams: curriculum is ethnocentric as it focuses on white culture.
Ball (1994): National Curriculum ignores cultural and ethnic diversity. It promotes ‘Little Englandism’.
What did you learn about in school?

15. How does the ethnocentric curriculum cause underachievement?
Coard: ethnocentric curriculum may cause underachievement by undermining the self esteem of those from ethnic minorities.
Evaluation: unclear what impact ethnocentric curriculum may have. Asian culture is ignored but they tend to do well in education.
Discuss: In what ways is the education system ethnocentric?

16. 3. Assessment
The assessment game is rigged to validate the dominant culture’s superiority
Primary schools used ‘baseline assessments’ which were replaced in 2003 with FSP.
Overnight, black people now appeared to be failing e.g. in one local authority where black children in 2000 were the highest achievers upon entry to school, by 2003 the new FSP had black children ranked lower than whites across all developmental areas that it studied.

17. 4. The new ‘IQism’
“When teachers are asked to judge the ‘potential’ and/or ‘motivation’ of their students, they tend to place disproportionate numbers of black students in low ranked groups”
New IQism- teachers and policymakers make false assumptions about the nature of pupils’ ability or potential.
Tests used to stream students do not show a students genuine measure of potential- only gives a snapshot of achievement.
He concludes that the education system is racist, routinely disadvantaging ethnic minority pupils.

18. Criticisms (AO3)
Sewell: racism is not powerful enough to prevent individuals from achieving. He argues external factors are the main cause of underachievement.
Model minorities: Indian and Chinese students ‘overachieve’- how can there be racism in the education system?
Gillborn responds to this by claiming that this performs and ideological function (makes education system seem fair and meritocratic, ignores that model minorities experience racism in school)

19. Aim higher
‘Teacher racism not whole story’ JRF- Poverty, ethnicity and education Black Students Must Do Better To Get In To University Education.html Chinese Parenting? parenting Bengali & Pakistani communities living in poverty Pakistanis-living-in-deprived-neighbourhoods.html