Rosenthal & Jacobson did a study on a Californian primary school, telling teachers they had a test to see which children would 'spurt' ahead (just an IQ test) - within a year, almost half of the 'spurters' made significant progress, more so for young children.
this suggests that the ‘prediction‘ impacted the teachers beliefs producing a label and self-fulfilling prophecy.
Becker conducted an important interactionist study of labelling, 60 teacher interviews in Chicago:
finding that teachers judged pupils based on how close they were to an 'ideal pupil' - teachers saw children from middle-class backgrounds as closest to this ideal
Rist's study of an American Kindergarten found the teacher used information about children's home life to seat them in different groups
The 'Tigers' group was mostly middle-class and closest to the ideal, while the 'Cardinals' and 'Clowns' groups were mostly working-class and did more group activities than independent tasks
Hempel-Jorgensen studied two English primary schools and found differences according to the social class make-up of the schools. M/c ideal pupil = personality. w/c school ideal pupil = behaviour (quiet, passive, obedient)
Dunne & Gazeley argue that schools persistently produce working-class underachievement as a result of the labels and assumptions of teachers
Interviews in a state school found teachers normalised working-class underachievement but felt they could overcome it for middle-class students by setting extension work, while working-class students were entered for easier exams
