I want to investigate the concept of the relative academic failure of working class boys, as it is a relatively recent development that not only reflects the under achievement of boys but academic success of girls.
Rationale
I want to investigate the concept of the relative academic failure of working class boys, as it is a relatively recent development that not only reflects the under achievement of boys but academic success of girls. My motivation has been influenced by observing a lower ability classroom and viewing low school SATs results related to gender indicating the academic failure of working class boys, a part of my AS course. David Hargreaves, looked at the reasons for the failure of working class boys and suggested one of the reasons for this was the way in which teachers and pupils interact with each other. It is this Interactionalist perspective that I will adopt. My aim is to find the key factors contributing to the failure of working class boys within Coventry schools using concepts of social class and gender. This will inform my method which will be bas on non-participant observation of six year 9 classes. (154)
Concepts and Context
Since the early 1990's statistics taken from education authorities indicated that the academic success of males has decreased, they have been out performed by girls at most levels of the education system with the exception of physics at A levels. More recent statistics taken from the 1999 G.C.S.E's indicate that more girls than boys gained additional A*-C grades this supports my hypothesis of working class boys academically failing.
David Hargreves's study from 1967 "Social Relations in a Secondary School" suggests that deviant subcultures develop as a pupil reaction to labelling. They are predominantly found in bottom streams of secondary schools already labelled low stream failures. They are unable to achieve status in terms of the mainstream values of the school so they substitute their own set of values by which they can achieve success in the eyes of their peers. They do this by not respecting the teachers, arriving late and messing about all build up to academic failure. Furthermore, Hargreaves argues that many schools fail to produce a sense of dignity for working-class pupils. These anti school cultures are homogeneous and coherent groups. This research is both important and relevant and has a good correlation to my study in that it has tried to explain the fundamental factors leading to under achievement and as stated in my rationale this is the question that I hope to answer. However, the study is rather outdated and simplistic, in actual fact pupils' use a variety of adaptations, depending upon the ways the values of the school are accepted or rejected. I also think that there may be more contributing factors that have recently developed since his last study and has a former student of state education I feel that I have a certain edge of sociologists such as Hargreaves as I have just completed my G.C.S.E's. This enabled me to sit in a classroom for several years gaining a first hand experience about working class boys attitudes thus giving me background knowledge, I will know if they were to put on a front or lie. However, this study alone cannot provide adequate information to inform my research.
David Hargreaves research along with Paul Willis' study "Learning to Labour" conducted in 1977 will provide me with sufficient background information to accurately conduct a worthy investigation. He provides one explanation for this social phenomenon by using an ethnographic and interactionalist approach he attempts to understand the meanings pupils give to their schooling in particularly pro and anti school subcultures. Focusing on males in schools he found that those who displayed anti school behaviour, known as the "lads" formed a distinctive counter school sub cultural grouping characterised by its opposition to the values and norms perpetuated throughout the school. His study showed that "the lads" felt superior to conformist pupils known as "earoles" and showed little interest in academic work, preferring instead to amuse themselves by "having a laff". Although conducted more than thirty years ago this is still an important piece of research and a useful attempt at explaining the academic failure of working class boys. As stated in my rationale my method will be based on observation that follows very closely to Willis' investigation. This is a valuable study and relates well to my work as Willis focused strictly on males. However, Willis' study only provides the basis for the extremes of male behaviour in school e.g. pro or anti. He doesn't provide any explanation on what comes in between he largely ignores the other subcultures that develop within schools.
Mac an Ghail more recent investigation conducted in 1994 suggests that working class boys in particular are experiencing a "crisis of masculinity" due to being socialised into certain norms, values and beliefs, being a breadwinner. This research has direct correlation to my study of Coventry schools in that Coventry was once a city booming with industrial estates and factories. However, there has been a recent decline of manufacturing industry and increase in part time, more office-based jobs suiting the skills of women meaning it is more difficult for males to occupy this role. Mac an Ghail believed that ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
Mac an Ghail more recent investigation conducted in 1994 suggests that working class boys in particular are experiencing a "crisis of masculinity" due to being socialised into certain norms, values and beliefs, being a breadwinner. This research has direct correlation to my study of Coventry schools in that Coventry was once a city booming with industrial estates and factories. However, there has been a recent decline of manufacturing industry and increase in part time, more office-based jobs suiting the skills of women meaning it is more difficult for males to occupy this role. Mac an Ghail believed that this influenced their motivation and ambition. As a result subcultures have developed where the boys can gain "street cred" and peer group status from not working resulting in academic failure as mentioned in my rationale.
Together the three summaries provide sufficient evidence to support my hypothesis on working class boys therefore I will carry on with my initial intentions as stated in the rationale. (752)
Methodology
My investigation is going to be mainly focused around the primary method of non-participant observation as stated in my rationale, this is where a particular group of people, in this case working class boys, are closely observed and their activities noted. I have chosen this method, as I believe it is the best way of analysing the interactions between each of the working class boys and the teachers without taking them from their normal classroom environment, as a questionnaire and interview would. The qualitative technique of non-participant observation is less interested in statistics to prove its point, and more interested in the qualities of social life as mentioned in my rationale. Qualitative approaches are based on the belief that it is not appropriate or possible to accurately measure the social world so the only solution is to observe and describe what exactly is happening and try to offer possible explanations, which is what I intend to do. This method is best suited to my investigation and I feel that I can gather sufficient information to inform my study.
It would be easy to use a positivist approach however I do not feel that I will gather sufficient information even if I were to use an open-ended question questionnaire. I am aware of certain weaknesses regarding this method also I feel people are more inclined to lie when answering in a questionnaire whereas if they were left in their natural surroundings. There are also certain issues when undertaking interviews, this interactionalist approach is in the form of a conversation, which falls into two extremes: structured, reading off a piece of paper and unstructured, which is more in depth. Both types are a cause for concern if they were used in my study. Due to certain factors such as age and gender I feel I might have the potential to influence the replies, as Bowles and Gintis suggested they might take the "just get on with it" approach and agree to what ever I say. The reliability of the interview would also arouse suspicion as there is no reason why the participants, in my case working class boys, should tell the truth. If an unstructured interview was conducted each one might differ dramatically from the other meaning I would be unable to make an accurate generalisation. Time is also an important issue, which would influence my study as interviews take up a great deal of time and I would have to transcribe my results both are time consuming.
The participant observation highlights certain factors, which I think would dramatically influence my results thus making them unreliable. Unlike the non participant observation, the presence of the researcher in the group might make them act less naturally as they are aware of being studied. The researcher can also be drawn into the group and start to see things through the eyes of the other individuals meaning that it would be biased, making it unreliable.
I have decided to take an interpretivist approach to my investigation because it is bottom-up theory that analysis societies by the ways in which the individuals interpret the world which will also expose relevant views that cannot be revealed by any questionnaire or interview, this method is similar to those that are featured in my context and concepts. The interpretivist largely favours the use of qualitative methods those such as unstructured interviews and participant observation, they will me to see the world from the same perspective as those being studied, the working class boys.
An arrangement has been made with the appropriate departments for me to examine six lessons, four bottom set and two higher sets and then make a comparison, I would however like to observe more classes but time is not on my side, I feel that along with Willis' research I can make an accurate generalisation. I have decided to conduct my experiment in one of the science laboratories as I feel that there is adequate space and as mentioned in my rationale I had previously observed a table of SATs results from the science department indicating the academic failure of working class boys. There are certain ethical issues that I would have to take into consideration when conducting this kind of observation. The teachers and some pupils may think that I am judging them on their behaviour, and may therefore feel threatened by my presence in the classroom.
Having already had some experience regarding non-participant observations in my AS year I still intend to conduct a pilot study to iron out any problems. Obviously, problems do materialise so I will have the perfect opportunity to resolve these prior to running my final study.
(795)
Analysis
The aim of the investigation was to discover the reason for the academic failure of working class boys. I attempted to collect information through non-participant observation of several classes.
In my rationale, I stated that one of the reasons for the under achievement of working class boys was due to the interaction and labelling between teacher and pupil, I have found this very hard to prove or disprove.
The first issue to be raised would be times spoken to about behaviour negatively. The numbers suggested that boys are more badly behaved than girls, which I suspected from previous research. The results differed dramatically in each lesson. In some lessons the lads where warned every five minutes whereas in other lessons they were just left to get on with it. This could be to do with teaching styles and this might be one of the problems. This method of just letting them get on with it and maybe they will calm down could create a self-fulfilling prophecy, the lads might think that they could get away with it permanently.
One particular incident to be mentioned was the commencing of a certain lesson, the teacher was already present in the classroom before the class entered; they sounded like football hooligans, they were shouted, singing, screaming and pushing. The teacher raised her voice on several occasions in an attempt to calm them all down; she singled out one particular person out of the whole class who she called an idiot and sent him out. However, he was not acting any more rebellious than anyone else. I think that this was done just to set an example to the rest of the class, at the cost of the boys self esteem. This in itself could be an indication of why working class males are failing; the boy had been labelled a troublemaker before he even entered the classroom creating a self-fulfilling prophecy. The boys name was written down on the board as reminder to the teacher and as a symbol of her power to the rest of the class. In a way this is saying that the same fate is in store for the other lads. The boy who stood outside made many attempts to entertain the rest of the lads, Hargreaves concept of substituting the school rules for their own set of delinquent values, this included dancing, throwing items at the window and at one point he managed to open the window from the outside to ask if he could come in because his friends were no longer amused. The lads inside the classroom seemed even more thrilled to see their friend standing outside and made many attempts to contact him even when the lesson had begun, with their friend already labelled they continued to disrupt the class.
In comparison to one of the top set classrooms there was no teacher present when the pupils entered the room, I think that this shows a lot of trust by the teacher, they were all talking but the important thing was that they sat down straight away and got out their equipment ready to start the lesson. They carried on their discussions even when the teacher entered the classroom she accepted this. Once the presence of the teacher became known they gradually began to settle down. Perhaps if the teacher in the lower set classroom showed more trust towards her pupils then they might start acting more responsible, however, this could have the reverse effect and become more chaotic.
I think that my study is extremely identical to Willis' study; however, one issue that was not raised by Willis was the amount of time devoted to each people. One classroom featured a teacher and two assistants; the teacher tried her best to teach the whole class whereas the two assistants spent all their time with the girls. The lads got no additional help or motivation from the assistants and in their eyes they could be labelled as failures as the teachers didn't see much point in teaching them and made it seem that they wanted nothing to do with them.
During my observations no educational questions where asked by any males, however, a number of questions where answered by several pupils. In one science lesson a male student willingly answered a question correctly from this point on he was labelled as a "geek" by his peers. The boy then spent the remainder of the lesson trying to gain back his social status by throwing paper balls at other classmates and being disruptive, this can be interpreted by Mac an Ghail' theory on males having a masculinity crisis. I think this was due to the fact that the majority of questions answered in that lesson where by girls and the lads saw it as feminine.
During the four observations of the lower sets, a number of questions were answered. All of the questions answered by the lads were followed with a positive comment from the teachers. This reinforces theories that the teachers are not to blame as suggested by the Sackville GCSE sociology group, who found that a lot of boys believed that they were the victims of discrimination by teachers, it also eliminates some of the possibilities that they are not being encouraged.
In conclusion the results supports my rationale, that working class boys are under achieving, it also indicate that it could be because they are rejecting the messages of the education system and are trying to gain success in the eyes of their peers. The students I observed were reluctant to participate in the lesson and when they did they were called names thus creating a "bucket and crab" theory. When someone tries to get him or herself out of the bucket and try and achieve a grade, the other students pull them back in. However, this will only happen if the students allows it to, in my observation it did. To make a better generalisation I would need to study more classes and for longer. (1001)
Evaluation
As the rationale is crucial to the rest of the study, I feel that I have proven the hypothesis to be clear and researchable, as I have reached a conclusion. This is that working class boys are academically failing because they resist the processes of the school and they reject the messages of the education system.
The contexts that I chose were well researched and extremely helpful, as they allowed my research to take a very specific focus, so it was not to broad or to vague. The background material that I selected was suitable; I was able to relate it to my rationale. However, combined with the outcome of my pilot study and my own experiences I think that they may have influenced my final observation. At times, I don't think that I kept an open mind and was almost predicting and expecting certain outcomes, this may be reflected in my results making my conclusions less valid.
There were, however, flaws in conducting my non-participant observation. When I approached the teacher about observing the lesson, I got the impression that I was not wanted. This may have affected my study because the teacher would have been acting differently which would have changed the atmosphere of the classroom. They also might have been inclined to help the boys more; this would have affected the outcome of my study, making my hypothesis harder to prove or disprove.
One other major problem was that I was drawn into a conversation with one of the pupils; it was extremely difficult to stay a non-participant observer. Some pupils also questioned me as to why I was staring at them, this may have been an indication of an ethical issue mentioned in my methodology, and they might have felt threaten by presence. Unfortunately this problem was not encountered in my pilot study so I was not really prepared for it.
Another issue was that one of the teachers was absent which meant that the class had to have a cover teacher instead of their usual one. Again this might affect the atmosphere of the classroom thus affect the final outcome of my results. From personal experiences a cover teacher usually dictates set work to the class and leaves them to get on with it, they rarely interact.
The ratio of the class of boys to girls was uneven in that there were more girls than boys, I would need to take into consideration if I were to do it again. This may have due to some of the pupils not being present the lads were apparently truanting for two of the lessons, there is not much that can be done to correct this problem but it does suggest another reason as to why working class boys are academically failing. It has affected my results as there was not a true representation of both of the sexes, so it is impossible to make an accurate generalisation about the reasons why working class boys are academically failing.
Another concern was the fact that each of my observations only lasted for 50 minutes, which is not really long enough to make a generalisation. I think I needed to carry out more observations, with the same groups, maybe for a week just to make them more reliable. I think that the time of day that I carried out the observation can have a dramatic affect on the results, first thing Monday morning is going to have a completely different atmosphere compared with the lesson before break and lunch or the last lesson on a Friday afternoon. If I were to study them for a week I would be able to take all of this information into account and interpret it with far more accuracy. If I were to further this experiment given time, I would have conducted structured interviews with some of the male students in the class.
My final conclusion is that working class boys are not academically achieving because they chose to have success in the eyes of their friends and therefore are not focussed on the task set. However, it is not entirely clear how true this statement actually is. There are many other factors that can affect a pupil's achievement such as discrimination and domestic problems.
(711)
