Internal factors for attainment

something that happens within school that contributes towards carried attainment levels

labelling, streaming/ triage, subcultures, school ethos/pupil identities

teachers have specific expectations of students and have the power to make labels stick so are likely to provide a self-fulfilling prophecy

teachers have an ideal pupil stereotype that is associated with working class, obedient pupils who are kind, dress smart and speak in elaborate code

schools operate with a middle class habitus and the ideal pupil stereotype demonstrates all of these core values

usually labelled as misbehaving and bad at school so are payed less attention to, likely to be profiled as people that reject school and are deviant

w/c are entered more into lower exams e.g Foundation papers, m/c more likely to progress into university and not shy away from Oxbridge as they align with its norms, m/c set more extension work and spoken to more in schools, classes usually align with sets

poorer backgrounds are seen as people that reject school and don’t align with its values therefore teachers give up

rosenthal and jacobson

children were tested and teachers were told who were predicted to be late bloomers, the late bloomers were treated differently as teachers made the classroom a better environment for them e.g more feedback, more talking time, same students were tested and the late bloomers outperformed all other students even though they were not actually late bloomers

attainment not all people adopt the label and have a self fulfilling prophecy e.g black London girls with negative labels used them as a motivator and rejected school yet outperformed many peers, teachers have a varied perception of an ideal pupil

the educational triage (A-C economy)

Gillbourne and Youdell

schools stream and set students based on their requirements for League table positions, those that are likely to achieve C grades and above ar focused on but those who are likely to fail are left to die an educational death

marketisation (1988 ERA)

people in lower sets are discouraged to succeed and are with students who are likely to have an anti school mindset, teachers have lower expectations etc

ball’s beachside comprehensive study

Ball investigated the effects of removing streaming and setting in a school, saw that regardless of there being no sets the students were still treated differently based on class, still resulted in polarisation and groups forming

not all working class are in lower sets, some working class still achieve high, some middle class fail, people can move between sets and streams

students being placed into groups based on academic ability

how students split themselves into opposite groups with opposite mindsets when being differentiated into streams and sets

group that shares the same norms and values

people share the same mindsets surrounding education therefore can be influenced to both do well or do bad

Paul WIllis’ learning to labour study

looked into 12 working class boys over 18 months showing the end of their education and the start of their employment, found that they rejected education and became part of the lads subculture, wanted to have a laugh and displayed disruptive behaviours that rejected school, ended up in labour intensive employment

subcultures within schools exist and continue towards employment

schools are heard to research as there are many gatekeepers, people that misbehave are unlikely to be investigated as schools don’t want a bad reputation, hard to obtain consent

not everyone in a pro school/ anti school subculture conform to their norms and values, other factors such as family may be more influential

how the school conducts themselves as what values they possess

high values and regard to attainment encourage students to behave that way, likely to attract students that aim to achieve high

if students identify as academic and accept school they are likely to encourage such atmosphere within school

bourdieu theory that areas of society possess different social values and norms usually based on class, middle class habitus within schools

schools adopt a MC habitus which rejects WC values and devalues the working class causing them to be marginalises and excluded

more cultural capital, elaborate code, uniformity, conformity, experience within education, drive to succeed

working class must achieve status in alternative ways to school as they cannot align with the MC values so therefore wear Nike as a style, ways to gain status and not become a social reject YET makes them a rebel and reject school so are seen as actively disengaged within the school system

quite subjective and hard to explain a cause and effect relationship as people may just choose to wear Nike for other reasons

some pupils may reject the school ethos and not decide to follow the norm, Nike identities may cause polarisation rather than gaining status e.g students in grammar schools

institutional racism, sexism, classism