Transcript Education - Virgin Media

Differential Educational Achievement 3.Ethnicity
It is not a simple case of ethnic
minorities not doing well at school.
There are many variations between and
within ethnic groups
Differential Educational Achievement 3. Ethnicity
• Britain is said to be a
multicultural society – but what
does this mean?
• Modern Britain is made up of
many different ethnic groups i.e.
groups with shared traditions and
history making them distinct
from other groups.
• Statistics suggest that not all
ethnic groups do equally well in
education.
Differential Educational Achievement 3. Ethnicity
Modhood et al 1997
In a study by the Policy Studies Institute in 1997
Modhood et al found the following patterns in
educational achievement:
• Chinese, African Asians and Indian groups
were more qualified than whites.
• Ethnic minorities were more likely to stay on in
education after 16 than whites
Differential Educational Achievement 3. Ethnicity
Modhood et al 1997
•
•
•
Bangladeshi and Pakistani women were the least
well qualified of all female groups and Bangladeshi,
Pakistani and Afro-Caribbean men were the least
well qualified of all male ethnic groups.
Afro-Caribbean boys are more likely to be excluded
from school and placed in lower streams than any
other ethnic groups.
It is important to remember that these are average statistics and
therefore individual students can go against the trend of their respective
ethnic groupings
Differential Educational Achievement 3. Ethnicity
Inside School factors
Coard 1971
•
•
•
•
•
•
Coard found evidence of low self esteem
amongst ethnic minorities.
He believed that schools made ethnic
minorities ‘feel inferior in every way’.
Black people and their achievements are ignored
in the curriculum, ‘white’ is associated with good
and ‘black’ with evil.
This all led to low self esteem for ethnic
Differential Educational Achievement 3. Ethnicity
Inside School factors
•
•
•
Commission For Racial Equality 1988
In a study at a school they called ‘Jayleigh’ the
CRE found that teacher assessment meant that
white pupils were entered for a greater number of
GCSE’s than Asian students.
Also, more Asian students were placed in lower
sets throughout their school careers.However this
study is over 30years old and other researchers
have argued that things have much improved.
Differential Educational Achievement 3. Ethnicity
Inside School factors
•
•
•
Gillborn 1990
Gillborn found that labelling played a significant
part in the performance of different minority
groups.
Teachers had different expectations of different
ethnic groups and particularly saw black males as
more ‘trouble’
Differential Educational Achievement 3. Ethnicity
Inside School factors
•
•
•
•
Gillborn 1990
they were the ones more likely to challenge authority
and consequently more likely to be thrown out of
lessons and ultimately excluded from school.
Gillborn called this the ‘myth of the black challenge’
and the labelling led to a self-fulfilling prophecy.
However this study is 20 years old and other
researchers have argued that things have much
improved.
Differential Educational Achievement 3. Ethnicity
Inside School factors
•
Wright 1992
•
Wright found evidence of institutional racism in the policies and attitudes
of education.
•
Even though teachers in her study were committed
to equal opportunities they gave less attention to
Asian girls
(particularly in class discussions where wrong
assumptions were made about their English not
‘being good enough’)
and punished Afro-Caribbean boys more and sent
•
•
Differential Educational Achievement 3. Ethnicity
Inside School factors
Mason 1995
• Mason says that education is not ‘racist’ but it is
ethnocentric
• (i.e. showing an ignorance and disregard for other
cultures)
• consequently non white cultures are not promoted
despite the modern emphasis on ‘multi-culturalism’
Differential Educational Achievement 3. Ethnicity
Inside School factors
Mirza 1992
• Mirza found that negative labelling did not
necessarily lead to low self esteem for ethnic
minority students.
• She found that black girls had positive self images
and high aspirations.
• Some teachers were well meaning but paradoxically
held back black girls by over compensating for them
and not pushing them enough.
Differential Educational Achievement 3. Ethnicity
Inside School factors
Mac An Ghaill 1992
•
•
Mac An Ghaill studied 25 Afro-Caribbean and Asian A level
students and found that all had experienced some problems
due to racism in school but had adopted ‘survival strategies’
to deal with them.
They avoided teachers with particular reputations, kept their
heads down in some lessons and confided in other teachers
whom they trusted. The most successful students were the
ones who learnt to steer themselves through these obstacles.
Differential Educational Achievement 3. Ethnicity
Outside School factors
Swann Report 1985
• This report found that social and economic factors
were the most important explanations for some
ethnic minority groups failing in education.
• Levels of poverty, standards of housing and parental
involvement were far more important than any IQ
differences.
Differential Educational Achievement 3. Ethnicity
Outside School factors
Driver and Ballard (1981)- Language
• Found that Asian children whose first language was
not English were as good at English as their class
mates by the age of 16.
• Labelling theorists have argued that accent rather
than language has influenced teacher expectations
and lead to negative labeling.
• Also European languages are seen as superior to non
European languages, French and German are given
a higher status than Chinese or Gujarati.
Differential Educational Achievement 3. Ethnicity
Outside School factors
Cultural Deprivation
• As with social class, cultural deprivation (the idea
that working class and ethnic minorities are
deprived of the values needed for school success) has
been cited as a reason for the failure of some ethnic
minorities.
• However, Pryce attacked this in 1979 and stated that
many Afro-Caribbean parents did take a large
interest in their children’s education and sent them
to extra schooling sessions on Saturday mornings
Differential Educational Achievement 3. Ethnicity
Outside School factors
Smith And Tomlinson 1989
• argue that class background of pupils was more
important than ethnicity in explaining poor
academic success.
• Pakistani, Bangladeshi and Afro-Caribbean groups
are more likely to be in lower social class positions
• whereas Chinese, African Asian and Indian groups
are more likely to be in higher social class positions.
Differential Educational Achievement 3. Ethnicity
Outside School factors
Driver & Ballard 1981 - Family Life
• suggest that the tight knit extended families and high
parental expectations amongst Asian communities
are significant factors in academic success.
• Lupton 2004 agrees and says that the respectful
nature of Asian parent-child relationship helps in the
pupil-teacher role
• Others point to the high percentage of single families
in Afro-Caribbean families and the resulting
material deprivation as being significant.
Differential Educational Achievement 3. Ethnicity
Outside School factors
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Conclusion
Mac An Ghaill says that we need to move away from mono-causal explanations
and look at the inter-relationship of class, gender and ethnicity.
Gillborn and Gipps 1996 argue that terms such as ‘white’ ‘black’ ‘Asian’ etc
prevent a real understanding of the differences. Such terms are social creations
and are no longer useful.
Many English people would see their culture as very different from Polish people
yet could be lumped together under the banner ‘whites’.
Similarly the terms ‘Black’ or ‘Asian’ cover a whole host of groups with different
culture, language identity etc.
Post Modernists take this further and suggest that society is so diverse it is
impossible to explain educational attainment in terms of such categories as class,
gender, ethnicity etc.
Generalisations do more harm than good
We need to make more of an attempt to understand the complex nature of culture