Relationships and Processes Within Schools

• Labelling theory

  Developed by Howard Becker, most associated with the sociology of deviance. Applied to education in the context of teachers applying labels to their pupils in relation to their ability, potential or behaviour. These labels can be positive or negative and can result in a self-fulfilling prophecy.
• Labelling theory


  • It is an interactionist theory, there is no suggestion that a self-fulfilling prophecy is inevitable: people could also choose to reject the label. This is sometimes described as a self-refuting prophecy.
• The experiment has been repeated many times with similar results, demonstrating a degree of reliability.
• From a research methods perspective, there are potential ethical issues with experimenting on children and interfering with their education in this way.
• Self-fulfilling prophecy


  If teachers labelled pupils as high-flyers or unusually gifted, their attainment came to reflect that label (and, theoretically, the opposite would also be true, with negative labels).
• Halo effect


  One possible impact of a positive label being applied to pupils by teachers. If a pupil has been labelled positively (as an ideal pupil perhaps) then their behaviour will be interpreted differently than the same behaviour might be for a different pupil. As such they are less likely to be disciplined.
• Ghom and Youdell argue that schools perform a triage, categorising pupils into those who will achieve anyway, hopeless cases, and borderline cases who require attention and input to get their 5 Cs at GCSE. They linked this with the pressure on schools to maintain their position on league tables and the published A Crate.
• It is very hard to prove the extent to which teachers label, how much pupils are aware of such labelling and its impact. This is especially the case as most sociologists interested in the theory argue that labelling could have many possible (and sometimes contradictory) effects.
• Interactionist sociologists (who are the ones most interested in labeling) do not look at structural reasons for why some pupils are labelled and others are not. However, it is clear from various studies that working-class pupils and pupils from certain minority-ethnic groups are much more likely to have a negative label applied to them than, say, a white middle-class girl.
• Mirza argued that labelling did not have a negative effect on the black girls she studied. In fact, if anything it made them more determined to succeed (although this could be seen as a self-refuting prophecy and interactionists would acknowledge this was a possible outcome from labelling).
• As well as anti-school subcultures, like "the Lads" in Willis' study, other groups of students can form pro-school subcultures. These pupils are likely to strongly buy into the ethos and identity of the school, be supportive of its rules and principles and to place high value on compliant behaviour, hard work and academic success.
• Post-modernists, like Bauman and Maffesol, would tend to see subcultures today more in terms of cultural identity rather than the product of labels or has having clear links to differential achievement or attitudes to school. Subcultures in school are more likely to be defined by music and fashion preferences than by social class or pro- or anti-school.
• For Willis, studying subcultures was not just about the processes and interactions at school but how these intersect with life outside school and the structures of society. For Willis, the important point was that these were working-class boys who would not get good qualifications and would therefore go on to do jobs not dissimilar to those their fathers did. It was all about how the education system reproduced itself.
• Pupil identities


  Shaped by influences both inside and outside school, including teacher labels and attitudes to school (and attendant subcultures). Postmodernists argue that identity is increasingly a matter of choice, with pupils grouping together around music, fashion, sport, etc. rather than on attitudes to school.
• Hidden curriculum

  The norms and values taught in a more subtle or covert way, beyond the formal curriculum. Functionalists see this as teaching the necessary norms and values for society to function, while conflict theorists see it as teaching people to accept the principles of capitalism or patriarchy.
• Setting


  Placing individuals into groups (sets) based on their ability, where someone might be in top set for one subject and bottom set for another.
• Streaming


  Splitting pupils into groups based on their ability, which they stay in across all their subjects.
• Banding


  The process of placing pupils of similar academic ability in the same group, such as top, middle or lower band.
• Setting, streaming and banding are also institutional labels, and the same points raised about other forms of labelling apply here.
• Sometimes schools try and disguise that banding is occurring by giving the bands or streams neutral names rather than 1, 2, 3 or A, B, C. Setting is more flexible than streaming as it is easier for people to move up or down sets in, say, English than to move streams across the board.
• This topic area closely links with the core themes of culture and identity. Schools have their own culture and within that culture there is the potential for several subcultures. Pupils have their own identities that are shaped by processes in schools and relationships with teachers and peers.
• As this topic area is applied, it is also highly relevant to the core theme of stratification as this topic essentially adds the detail to the "in-school factors" referred to throughout the previous three sections.