Examine sociological explanations of difference in the educational performance of ethnic minorities in Britain.
Examine sociological explanations of difference in the educational performance of ethnic minorities in Britain.
There are many cultural explanations into why the educational performance of ethnic minorities in Britain can be determined. However, like any kind of pupil gender, ethnicity and class make a considerable difference to the educational achievement of ethnic minorities in Britain. The idea of labelling and stereotyping pupils due to there ethnic class is easily identified and in the case of ethnic minorities such things as the language barrier, different cultural beliefs and family beliefs should be especially considered these factors can therefore perpetuate these labels.
Language is not always the first language of some ethnic minority households in Britain today. Even still a type of cultural diversity exists in ethnic households. Ballard noticed that extended family households were common in minority ethnic groups. These tended to be originating from South Asia: Pakistan, Bangladesh and India. Ballad noticed lots of differences between these families compared to the white majority. In 1981 Ballard and Driver noticed that at the age of sixteen Asian children whose main home language was not English were at least as competent in English as there fellow classmates. Statistics prove that in England and Wales since 1988 ethnic groups are improving at least twenty percent. Indian children are over taking white children and Black (Children of Afro Caribbean and black African origin) are the most unimproved minority. What those statistics didn’t tell us is that in early year education Pakistani and Bangladeshi children’s attainment was very low, this mirrors the problem with the language barrier. By sixteen these children were competent enough in English and therefore improved in secondary schooling. Afro-Caribbean children made a good start in primary education and considerably declined in secondary education. Is has proved to be probably true, due to labelling, racism, behaviour and the ethnocentric education system. This evidence can be backed up by the work of Gillborn and Mirza, in 1990, they studied an11-16 comprehensive school and found teachers were unintentionally penalising Afro-Caribbean students due to having preconceived ideas therefore being treating Afro-Caribbean children differently. This research was carried out within the school and was based on the ideas of labelling and how the teacher can affect the educational performance of minorities in Britain. Wright in 1986 also investigated this case; he studied secondary schools focusing on the interaction between the teacher and pupil. He again noticed how Afro-Caribbean children were being characterised and found that they were often placed in academic bands and exam sets that did not reflect there potential. Wright, again in 1992 researched four multicultural schools and found out that these children were unintent ally being discriminated, teachers held stereotypical ideas of certain minorities. For example the stereotype of Asian girls being seen as quiet and submissive and therefore being considered as invisible in class, the stereotype that Afro-Caribbean boys being seen as having behaviour problems and have a low potential, resulting in conflict with teachers and having a very low opinion of school. These tendencies surely are apparent to the government as these patterns in statistics occur time and time again. Not only that this of course affects the educational performance of minorities.
