Studies

• Howard becker (1979)

  interviewed 60 chicargo high school teachers

  students were judged by how closely they fit the imagine of the “ideal pupil“

  they were mainly labelled off work conduct and appearance

  Mc- closest to ideal ( middle class)

  wc- furthest to ideal -badly behaved (working class)
• Amelia Hempt- jargenson (2009)

  these nations vary according to the social class make up of the school
• aspen primary school (largely working class)

  staff said ”discipline was a major problem”

  ideal pupil: quiet, passive and obedient
• Rowan primarily ( mainly middle class)

  very few discipline problems

  ideal pupil:was described in terms of personality and academic ability
• dunne and gazerely (2008)

  • argue that schools persistently produce working class underachievements
• Roy Rist (1970)

  study of American kindergarten shows

  teachers used information about children’s home backgrounds appearance to place them in separate groups
• Rosenthal and jacobson

  told oak community school

  -stated they had a test specially designed to identify pupils pupils how would “spurt” ahead in school

  -picked 20% at random and again falsely told the school

  -returning to the school a year later they found 47% of the selected students had made improvement
• Becker- shows, teachers do not usually see working class children as ideal pupils they have lower expectations
• Douglas- kids who had been steamed when they were 8 improved there iq by 11
• gillborn and youdell-

  found that teachers are less likely to see working class and black students as having ability as a result these pupils are more likely to be placed in lower stream
• Louis archer et al (2010) says because the working class habitus is different to schools habitus they are bund to clash