Ethnicity

• Ext: linguistic skill

  Language spoken by low income black family inadequate for educational success
• Ext: Asian family structure and support


  Indian and Chinese students benefit from supportive families that have an 'Asian work ethic' and place high value on education.
• Ext: Black family structure and support


  Black family lack a male role model, lack of nurture or tough love. Boys being brought up on 'ultra-tough ghetto superstar...MTV'.
• Ext: White w/c family


  Working class white family, lack parental support, lack aspiration for university, and poor level of behaviour in school.
• Ext: material deprivation


  Ethnic minorities such as Bangladeshi/Pakistani - low income family, unemployed, homeless, poverty, lack of resources and income.
• Ext: racism in wider society


  Racism in society, leads to social exclusion. e.g. harder to get a job, leaving EM unemployed.

  -> lowers aspirations

  -> lack of role models in professional jobs
• Int: black student labelled

  Labelled as 'disruptive', challenge authority, pose discipline problems often based on racial stereotypes. Leads to more exclusions from school, streamed low and the SFP.
• Int: Asian student labelled


  Labelled as 'inferior', assumed they had poor english skills, left out of classroom discussions and often spoke in simplistic language to them.
• Int: pupil identity

  • Archer: teachers stereotyped students based on identity. E.g. Ideal pupil - white middle classpathologised - Asian, feminised , passivedemonised - black or white hyper-heterosexual identity (usually working class). Chinese students can be both praised AND viewed negatively by their teachers. Success achieved BUT in the 'wrong way'.
• Int: Fuller’s girls


  These girls, high achievers in a school where black girls placed in low stream. Rejected the negative stereotypes about them, focused educationally, BUT stayed friends with girls in low stream and ACHIEVED.
• Int: Mirza’s girls


  These girls, where unable to resit the racist attitudes of their teachers, channeled it by AVOIDING lessons, leading to their failure.
• Int: Sewell boys


  Sewell argued that there are 4 responses to racist teacher labelling:

  • rebels - most visible - disruptive. 
  • innovators - second largest group - pro-education BUT anti-school.
  • retreatist - minority disconnected from both school/peers
  • conformist - largest group - accepted school values. 
• Int: institutional racism


  Discrimination that is built into the way institutions such as schools operate.

  • E.g. No effective racism strategy, school year is organised around Christian festivals
  • School uniforms
  • Food served in canteen not catering for ethnic groups.
• Int: ethnocentric curriculum


  Educational policy, e.g. School Curriculum that gives priority to one culture over another.

  • E.g. Teaching white history, past glories of the British Empire and European languages.
• Int: marketisation


  Marketisation gives schools scope to select their pupils.

  These procedures favoured white pupils and disadvantaged those from ethnic backgrounds.

  e.g. application forms only in English

  ->parents unaware of how the school admission procedure works

  ->Racist bias in interviews for school places.
• Gillborn


  Studied black students and labelling (disruptive)

  Institutional racism, e.g. New IQism and streaming
• Wright


  Studied Asian student and labelling (ignored)
• Sewell


  Studied black boys and subcultures (x4)

  Peer pressure and lack of father figure