education as a institution PDF

Preview

Summary

Notes= theory educational achievements Material Deprivation and Social class, ethnicity and gender differences in educational achievement...

Description

4th lesson Intelligence and Educational Achievement - Agnostic  Intelligence and achievement may be socially constructed and explanations for their relationships take place in three forms: agnostic, positive, and negative  Agnostic – we do not know if there is a correlation between intelligence and achievement  1. there is no agreed definition of intelligence so we do not know what is being measured.  2. if we could agree on what intelligence is, there is no consensus about how it can be reliably and validly measured.  Further problems arise if intelligence is conceptualized as a relationship  This means it is seen as something fluid, created by individuals as they go about their lives and expressed in different ways and contexts, rather than as a permanent quality.  Suggests intelligence develops through cultural practices and ways of learning rather than it being something we are born with.  Intelligence is difficult to define precisely, but we can all agree that it refers to ability as opposed to achievement POSITIVE  Positive Correlation – argues we can assume IQ tests measure significant aspects of intelligence in the form cognitive skills - research shows a positive correlation between intelligence and educational achievement.  In the UK, Saunders argues that intelligence while not determined at birth differs amongst social classes.  knowledge and experience passed from middle class parents to children  middle class parents instill the importance of educational qualifications.  Intelligent working-class children are educationally successful and rise into the middle class – social selection  Middle class children who fail to capitalize on their social advantages fall back into the working class  Middle class children will, on average, be more intelligent than working class children. NEGATIVE  Negative – follows two lines of reasoning  No surprise if there is no correlation between intelligence and educational achievement mainly because the skills valued and taught in schools and tested in public examinations are those measured by IQ tests  Educational achievement is not related to intelligence, rather it is related to cultural factors inside and outside the education system that allow some students to do well but severely limit the ability of others. “The vast majority of one’s ultimate niche is society is determined by non-IQ factors, ranging from social class to luck”  Social Class – the individual’s position in a class-based system of social stratification, conventionally defined by occupation.  Some argue that because the people who make the IQ tests are from the educated middle class that if you score high on the IQ tests then you must be as intelligent as the person who made the test. The values reflected in IQ testes are those of the middle class.

Differential Achievement One of the primary purposes of the education system in our society is to differentiate children, as part of the social process of their passage into wider society. Such differentiation - whilst clearly of significance - might not be particularly important (for the purpose at hand), if it can be shown that differences in educational attainment are simply the result of natural or innate differences between individuals: That is, that children have different levels of ability or intelligence and the education system simply reflects these differences in terms of measured attainment levels (the passing of exams, for example). If this is the case, sociological explanations for differential educational achievement can be simply dismissed. If differences are more-or-less entirely due to natural differences then, by definition, there is nothing for the sociologist to explain. However, if we find this "natural" or "innate" form of explanation to be lacking in validity, it follows that we need to provide a sociological explanation of differential achievement, since it is evident that such differences must be based upon social factors either within the education system or wider society. When we look at the differentiation process, it becomes clear that latent (or hidden) patterns of differential educational achievement are revealed. These patterns involve differences in educational achievement between:  Social classes,  Males and females,  Ethnic groups.

Material Deprivation and Social class, ethnicity and gender differences in educational achievement Marxism and material deprivation and cultural reproduction. (CLASS) Material deprivation is a lack of money, which leads to disadvantages, such as unhealthy diet and a lack of materials such as computer and textbooks. J.W.B Douglas examined education of 5,362 British children and grouped the children in terms of their ability, which was measured by IQ tests. He then divided them into four social class groupings and found significant variations between students of a similar ability but who were from different social backgrounds.  Marxists believe that differential achievement comes from material deprivation and cultural capital.  Material deprivation – a cause of educational underachievement, refers to factors such as poverty, a lack of physical resources, etc.  Marxists focus on materialistic explanations of poverty  Education systems are dominated by middle class norms, values, and beliefs. This creates a class sub-culture within schools and many students can not adapt. – This is called cultural reproduction. CULTURAL REPRODUCTION  Formal curriculum assists cultural reproduction through streaming  Streaming shows students that life is ‘unequal’, and this is normal  Cultural reproduction is disguised as a consequence of the choices students make and their differing levels of ability or aptitude  Ideological State Apparatus (ISA) – Marxist concept that argues that institutions such as schools encourage values favorable to the interests of a ruling class in capitalist societies.  Vocational education has advantages for ruling class  eliminates working-class children as competitors for high-level jobs  gives the appearance of being ‘chosen’ through academic performance  Middle class – educational qualifications are an important way of reproducing individual class positions  Working class – the work-based route to money and status has always been more important  the by-products are underachievement, truancy and exclusion  Social class is the best predictor of academic achievement Gibson and Asthana (1999) pointed out that there is a correlation between low household income and poor educational performance. There are a number of ways in which poverty can negatively affect the educational performance of children. For example 1. Higher levels of sickness in poorer homes may mean more absence from school and falling behind with lessons 2. Less able to afford ‘hidden costs’ of free state education: books and toys are not bought, and computers are not available in the home 3. Tuition fees and loans would be a greater source of anxiety to those from poorer backgrounds.

4. Poorer parents are less likely to have access to pre-school or nursery facilities, 5. Young people from poorer families are more likely to have part-time jobs, such as paper rounds, baby sitting or shop work, creating a conflict between the competing demands of study and paid work. Supporting evidence for the importance of material deprivation    

Stephen Ball (2005) points out how the introduction of marketisation means that those who have more money have a greater choice of state schools because of selection by mortgage Conner et al (2001) and Forsyth and Furlong (2003) both found that the introduction of tuition fees in HE puts working class children off going to university because of fear of debt Leon Fenstein (2003) found that low income is related to low cognitive reasoning skills amongst children as young as two years old The existence of private schools means the wealthy can afford a better education. Children from private schools are over-represented in the best universities

MARXIST VIEW: GENDER AND ETHNICITY IN EDUCATION

IN

ED Marxists focus on gender in education by looking at gender within social class  go figure… Marxism and Social Classes  Little difference in male/female attainment in math/science  No difference at the lowest achievement levels for all other subjects  Girls do better than boys among mid-to-high achievers with a correlation between achievement and class that there is between achievement and gender  Ethnicity is a good general predictor of educational achievement  some argue this is correlated to social class  some argue that there is institutional and cultural racism Marxists argue that the poor educational achievement of many ethnic minorities is because they are located within the proletariat. They argue that the education system is designed to fail the working class and so ethnic minorities experience the same degree of oppression as white working-class members. AO2 point: However, in addition to class exploitation they concede that ethnic minorities may also experience racism from other members of society, including teachers and students. Thus ethnic minorities often find themselves, because of educational underachievement, at the bottom of the social structure in low-status, low-skilled employment, suffering unemployment levels twice that of the white population. Some Marxists see ethnic groups as constituting a reserve army of labour, used and discarded when not needed, but also acting as a surplus labour pool that helps keep all wages low. AO2 point: Non-Marxists would point out that some ethnic minority groups are successful in the education system. Therefore, rather than the system, the problem seems to lie within some groups themselves. Some ethnic minority groups experience higher levels of poverty than white people. According to the Labour Force Survey 2004/05 20% of White British households are in income poverty compared to 25% of Indian, 30% of Black Caribbean, 45% of Black African, 55% of Pakistani and 65% of Bangladeshi households.

 Labelling – a process by naming something and, by so doing, associating it with a specific set of social characteristics  Implies that school processes such as labelling, stereotyping and low teacher/pupil expectations are potentially significant explanations  Schools can make a difference; levesl of working class achievement can be raised but the behavior and expectations of teachers can also compound the levels of material and cultural disadvantages many working-class children bring to the school. This (labelling theory) was introduced by Becker, who believed that the teacher’s interaction with their pupils could affect the way pupils behaved towards authority and school rules. The labelling theory states that teachers and school processes “label” pupils as either intelligent or not able, and in theory the pupils live up to these perceptions. This is known as a self-fulfilling prophecy. This relates to low educational attainment as pupils labelled as deviant should therefore act deviant, and go against school rules and authority. This means that they will fail exams on purpose, therefore underachieving at school. It has been suggested that norms and values of social classes influence performance in the educational system. Hyman found that members of the working class place a lower value on educations. They place less emphasis on formal education as a means to personal achievement and they see less value in continuing school beyond the minimum leaving age. He also found that members of the working class place a lower value on achieving higher occupational status. In evaluating jobs, they emphasize “stability, security and immediate economic benefits” and tend to reject the risks and investments involved in aiming for high status occupations. Jobs therefore tend to be limited to a “good trade”. Hyman found that members of the working class believe that there is less opportunity for personal advancement. This belief is probably the basis for the lower value placed on education and high occupational status. Hyman argues that although it is based on a realization that the working class does have less opportunity, the belief itself reduces opportunities even more.

Evaluations of the role of material deprivation 

To say that poverty causes poor educational performance is too deterministic as some students from poor backgrounds do well. Because of this, one must be cautious and rather than say there is a causal relationship between these two variables as the question suggests, it would be more accurate to say that poverty disadvantages working class students and makes it more difficult for them to succeed.



There are other differences between classes that may lead to working class underachievement. For example, those from working class backgrounds are not just materially deprived, they are also culturally deprived.



The Cultural Capital of the middle classes also advantages them in education.



In practise it is difficult to separate out material deprivation from these other factors.

Material deprivation and ethnicity 1. According to Strand (2007) only Pakistani and Bangladeshi underachievement can be explained in terms of their social and economic disadvantages – he argues that the high rates of poverty relate directly to their relative underachievement in education

2. Children of African Caribbean origin experience lower rates of poverty than Bangladeshi and Pakistani children yet do worse in education, suggesting that there must be other factors that explain their underachievement. 3. Children of Indian origin suffer higher levels of poverty than white children yet outperform them by 10% points

Cultural deprivation and Social class, ethnicity and gender differences in educational achievement

Functionalism and cultural deprivation Cultural Deprivation theory holds that some groups, such as the lower social classes, have inferior norms, values, skills and knowledge which prevent them from achieving in education. Inferior language skills, and the fact that working class parents do not value education are largely to blame for working class underachievement, rather than material deprivation. lot of research has indicated that class subcultures influence educational achievement. All of the studies below suggest that working class cultures are deficient and that working class children are deprived as a result. These explanations thus put the blame for working class underachievement on the working class families themselves. In these explanations, working class parents basically teach their children norms and values that do not equip them for education in later life. . This means that children are deficient in certain values, attitudes and skills, which are essential for educational success. Some deficiencies are a lack of ambition, a lack of motivation, little encouragement at home, few books, educational toys and educational visits and immediate gratification which leads to a lack of hard work and sacrifice needed for educational success. The effect becomes cumulative, if the child starts school like this and the effect increases as the time passes, the working class child is left further and further behind. The theory of cultural deprivation is that working class groups deprived of certain important factors before school accounts for low educational attainment or underachievement at school. Equality of opportunity can then only become a reality by compensating for the deprivations through education. This is otherwise known as positive discrimination in favour of culturally deprived children so they are given a helping hand so they can compete on equal terms with other children. Operation Head Start was a programme of pre-school education, which aimed to educate children before they reached school. This would mean that once they started school, all children both working class and middle class would have equal opportunities in education. Operation Head Start were a series of television programmes, for example “Sesame Street” which America believed would aid children in spelling and counting. Unfortunately, the results were very disappointing. The Westinghouse Corporation found it produced no long-term beneficial results, and children from working class backgrounds still had low educational attainment. In Britain, pre-school education began in the late 1960’s with the government allocating extra resources for school buildings in the low-income areas and higher wages for the teachers working in those areas. FUNCTIONALISM  Functionalism – supports argument for a meritocratic system.  Working Class underachievement explained by cultural deprivation  Cultural Deprivation – a lack of important cultural resources such as parental encouragement are the cause of educational underachievement of working class.  parental interest in education  family size (poorer families are typically larger)  position within family (older children typically achieve more)  deficient care of babies (at home parenting has positive effect)  Cultural deprivation has two main applications:  Working-class children encounter difficulties adjusting to middle-class norms and values found in schools.  Elaborated speech codes – complex vocabulary and ideas. (Middle Class) clashes with restricted speech codes – simple language to convey direct meanings. Predictable and express relatively simple, straightforward ideas. (Working Class)  Restricted speech of students clashes with the elaborated speech of middle class teachers. Research shows that this has influenced teacher assessments. Goodman and Gregg (2010) 80% of most affluent mothers expected their children to go to universities 40% of least affluent mothers “hoped” their children would go to university Children from poorer families believed they were less academic and were consequently less concerned about doing well academically than their middle class peers Five ways in which cultural deprivation can disadvantage children in education

1. Working class parents may show a lack of interest in their children’s education 2. Lower class parents are less able to help their children with homework 3. Lower class children are more likely to speak in a restricted speech code. Rather than the elaborated speech code- Basil Bernstein argued this. 4. Working class children are more concerned with Immediate Gratification rather than deferred gratification – Barry Sugarman argued this. 5. The underclass has a higher than average percentage of single parent families. Melanie Philips argued this. Supporting evidence for cultural deprivation theory These studies actually show that cultural and material deprivation are related 1. Connor et al (2001) conducted focus group interviews with 230 students from 4 different FE colleges from a range of class backgrounds, some of whom had chosen to go to university and some who had not chosen to go to University. The main findings were that working class pupils are discouraged from going to university for three main reasons: o Firstly, such candidates want ‘immediate gratification’. They want to earn money and be independent at an earlier age. This is because they are aware of their parents having struggled for money and wish to avoid debt themselves o Secondly, they realise that their parents cannot afford to support them during Higher Education and did not like the possibility of them getting into debt o Thirdly, they have less confidence in their ability to succeed in HE. 2. Research by Leon Fenstein found that low income was related to the restricted speech code. His research revealed that children of working-class parents tend to be more passive; less engaged in the world around them and have a more limited vocabulary. Children from middle-class households had a wider vocabulary, better understanding of how to talk to other people and were more skilled at manipulating objects. Ethnicity and achievement - Family background and cultural factors 1. South Asian women go to university despite cultural pressures - Bagguley and Hussain (2007) found that aspirations to higher...