Gillborn and Youdell found that teachers were quicker to discipline black pupils than others for the same behaviour. They say that this is a result of teachers ‘racialised expectations’. Teachers expected black pupils to bring problems and misinterpreted their behaviour as threatening or a challenge to authority. When teachers acted on this idea the pupils responded negatively and as a result further conflict arose. The black pupils felt that teachers picked on them and underestimated their ability. Gillborn and Youdell said that much of the conflict between white teachers and black pupils stems from racial stereotypes that teachers hold, rather than the actual behaviour of the pupils. This could explain why there are such high levels of exclusion of black boys from school. Jenny Bourne (1994) said that schools can tend to see black boys as a threat and therefore label them negatively which can ultimately lead to exclusion.
Cecile Wright (1992) conducted a study of a multi-ethnic primary school that showed that Asian children can be victims of teachers labelling also. Despite the schools ‘commitment’ to equal opportunities teachers held ethnocentric views; they took for granted English culture and Standard English was superior. This in turn affected how they related to the Asian pupils. Teachers assumed that they would have a poor grasp of the English language and then left them out of class discussions or they used simplistic language when speaking to them. The pupils felt isolated when teachers expressed their disapproval of their customs and mispronounced their names. Teachers saw them as a problem that they could ignore. The effect was that Asian pupils especially the girls were marginalised.
Research shows that pupils can respond to these labels in very different ways. Some respond by becoming disruptive or withdrawn. Or they may even refuse to accept the label and prove teachers wrong by working hard. It is not always true that negative labels always lead to self-fulfilling prophecy.
Mary Fuller (1984) studied a group of pupils that responded by rejecting the negative label that they were given. She studied a group of black girls in year 11 at a London comprehensive school. These girls were unusual because they were high achievers in a school were most black girls were placed in low sets. These girls instead of accepting the negative label the girls channelled their anger about being labelled into the pursuit of educational success. They didn’t seek approval from teachers or limit their friends to other academic achievers. Instead they were friends with other black girls from lower sets. Unlike the other successful pupils they only conformed as far as school work, they worked continuously, but gave the appearance of not doing so. They showed a deliberate lack of concern about school routines. They had a positive attitude to doing well at school but rather than looking for approval from teachers they preferred to rely on their own efforts and the impartiality of external exams.
The study highlights 2 important things. Firstly pupils may still succeed even when they refuse to conform. And that negatively labelling doesn’t always lead to failure.
Mac a Ghaill’s 1992 studied black and Asian A level students and reached similar conclusions to Fuller. But there is a study that slightly contradicts Fullers study. Mirza also studied black girls that faced teacher racism. But the girls in this study failed to achieve their ambitions because their coping strategies restricted their opportunities which resulted in under achievement.
Mirza said that the large majority of teachers held racist attitudes. Mirza identified 3 main types of racism. The colour blind teachers that in practise believe all pupils are equal but allow racism to go unchallenged. The liberal chauvinists that believe black pupils are culturally deprived and therefore have low expectations of them. And the overt racists who believe black people are inferior and actively discriminate against them.
Another internal problem is the ethnocentric curriculum. This is a curriculum that favours one ethnic group. Troyna and Williams describe the curriculum in British schools as ethnocentric as it gives main priority to white culture. Stephen Ball also critises the National Curriculum for ignoring cultural and ethnic diversity. Coard explains how the ethnocentric curriculum can produce under achievement. An example of this would be that in History the British are seen as bringing civilisation to the primitive peoples they colonised. This image of black people as inferior undermines black children’s self-esteem and can lead to their failure. Troyna and Williams also argue that schools are a place of institutional racism because they believe schools and colleges routinely discriminate against ethnic minorities.
These are only some of the internal factors that affect ethnic minority children whilst at school. There are also external factors that can have something to do with academic achievement. Examples of these are cultural and material deprivation. It is difficult to properly identify which of these factors is the largest to the contribution of ethnic achievement. Perhaps all of these factors work hand in hand into creating the results we see when we look at ethnic achievement.
by
abbieleft (student)
