Theories on education

a micro level

Howard Becker, idea that we all have labels applied, in school teachers have an ideal pupil stereotype and want all students to fit this, if students are/ aren’t this they will act accordingly leading to a self-fulfilling prophecy as they live the label they receive

labelled as a ideal student and therefore succeeding, labelled as a bad student and therefore failing.

George Herbert Mead, People interact through signs and symbols that are socially constructed and will react accordingly based on their experiences with the signs and symbols, for example waving at someone or a smart dress code

hands up in schools, following a line, colours symbolling marking, bells to change classes

Cooley, We observe ourselves through other peoples reactions to us, we believe we are a certain characteristic if people react to us in that way for example, if people laugh at what we say we percieve ourselves as funny

believeing you are smart if you are allowed to answer questions,

goffman, we each put on a front when with certain groups of people in order to blend in and be accepted, we are our authentic selves backstage or when we are most comfortable

only really act ourselves at home, act intellectual to fit an ideal pupil stereotype

Sorting pupils into groups based on their educational achievement across all subjects

Sorting pupils into groups based on their achievement in singular subjects

Steven Ball used participant observation in order to study the effects of streaming and banding, studied both mixed ability classes and banded classes

Students with initial similar attitudes to education were split to diverge into their streams with regards to their social class, Top stream students were upper class and were payed more attention to which improved their attainment and encouraged them to follow academic pathways, Lower stream students were cooled out and encouraged to pursue lower status vocations which hindered their potential and reinforced their class (working class)

They often developed an anti school mindset as they were payed less attention to and cooled out, they spend less time on homework and find school boring, low-ability labels encouraged them to not try and accept faliure

Setting resulted in unequal access and minimal social mobility for lower class students as they didn’t recieve their full education, teachers for top stream classes payed more attention and shared more knowledge than those in low stream classes

Rosenthal and Jacobson

High expectations lead to high performance and low expectations leads to poor performance, students went through testing, teachers were given random names of students who are considered ‘late bloomers‘, those students then were given special treatment and therefore succeeded more

a warmer climate such as through communication, more input such as being taught more material, more response opportunity when asked questions, better quality feedback demonstrating how the student can do better

The pygmalion affect did exist as those students who were ‘late bloomers’ and consequently were held at higher standards performed better. the label that they were given contributed to their self-concept

The label you are given is what you live by and you follow those characteristics

gillborn and youdell

idea that schools prioritise students based on what level they are predicted to achieve in the future. Those bordering a pass will get more attention than those who will not pass which are rejected in schools and left to die an educational death

one quality of a student overalls all and will be the master status and overriding label that the teacher gives them

people might find it difficult to override their status and then therefore accept it and force a sfp

too micro level and doesn’t consider the macro social factors, too deterministic and assumes everyone gives into labelling, ignores power imbalances, ignores external factors

proletariat Vs bourgeoisie, own means of production and work for these means on minimum wage

Teaching a group to believe a set of beliefs without criticism

The education system reproduces an legitimises inequalities as well as prepares people for the capitalist society

Dominant ideology of the ruling class, enforcing values of the upper class

althusser

that school is part of the ideological state apparatus

Ethnocentric fragmented curriculum (you can only learn certain high level subjects at a-level), ruling class values taught (history, literature, music), myth of meritocracy (legitimises failure through putting the blame on the students rather than the system), encourages growth mindset which further legitimises inequality

Bowles and gintis

Education has direct correlation to the workplace, students are taught values such as uniformity, punctuality, obedience and competition in order to prepare for work

Hidden curriculum

A giant myth making machine

Legitimises inequality by saying failiure is the students fault rather than the systems which prevents them from questioning the system, promoting the poor are dumb theory which justifies the poverty cycle and dubs it as inevitable as social mobility is hard to come across

More sophisticated language that is more used in education and is spoken generally at home by the bourgeoise, limits we students as they are usually unable to understand it which generates inequalities

The tongue of the working class, has more slang and not used in education

lower class lean more to low skillled vocational subjects, middle and higher classes lean more to educational subjects and uni

Social assets one has that allows for upwards social mobility e.g networks, schools, upper class have more cultural capital

Education favours the middle class most as the posses the most cultural capital, different classes had different habitius (social set of ideas) which pulled them into different lifestyles, education was middle class habitius which lead to inequalities

Illicit and freire

School created the basis of the hegemonic system within society by rewarding those who listen and do not demonstrate bad behaviour with good grades and good jobs whereas those who do not listen and rebel are put in low skilled jobs

Paul willis

Paul Willis investigated 12 working class males through participant observation and unstructured interviews to find that they are anti schools dn reject the school system and favour hard labour which is the jobs they usually end up in, school bores them so work doesn’t have a need to change this and therefore they complete boring manual tasks

School is now productions a different labour force so the ideology is outdated, assumes that students have no free will and will always accept the ideology taught, romanticises the anti-school mindset

consensus theory

making it fair for everyone in society for example accessing education

receiving a reward for your hard work

social solidarity, specialist skills/ role allocation, universalistic standards, meritocracy

social solidarity and specialist skills

universalistic standards and meritocracy

school passes on value consensus and social solidarity as subjects such as pe as students share norms and culture such as participation, norms shown both through overt and hidden curriculum

students are filtered into roles for the future society as they are taught skills and are naturally gravitated towards specific subjects such as maths, ensures the most talented individuals are given the best jobs

DURKHEIM- school provides general universal standards for people rather than the standards they received from their parents which reflects on society, schools encouraged achieved status rather than ascribed status

Davis and Moore

Equal opportunity doesn’t exist so it is not beneficial for all those in society, teaching specialist skills doesn’t mean that people will get into good jobs, argument that education favours the middle/ upper class rather than equal for all