5197546
Labelling.
- Labelling in secondary:
- Becker (1971)- internationalist study- interviews with 60 teachers, found that they judged
pupils to how closely they fitted an image of the ideal pupil.
- Pupils work, conduct, and appearance= key factors in labelling. M/C children= closest to ideal
- Pupils work, conduct, and appearance= key factors in labelling. M/C children= closest to ideal
- Cicourel & Kitsue (1963)- educational
counsellors- labelling disadvantaging
W/C, course deciding. Found
inconsistency in the way children were
assessed for courses. Judged on social
class/ race.
- Becker (1971)- internationalist study- interviews with 60 teachers, found that they judged
pupils to how closely they fitted an image of the ideal pupil.
- Labelling in primary:
- Rist (1970)- Found the teacher used information
about the child's home, and appearance to put
them in groups and seating. The fast learners
'tigers' tended to be M/C and had a neat
appearance, seated near to the desk/ gave
greatest encouragement. The 'clowns' &
'cardinals'= seated further away / lower level
books/ W/C.
- Sharp & Green (1975)- Children choose own activities/ developed at their own pace/ when they were ready to
learn they would seek help. those who weren't ready should engage in compensatory play. The M/C children=
started earlier, W/C= ignored. This supports the interactionism view, and negative labelling of W/C= result of
inequalities in wider society.
- Rist (1970)- Found the teacher used information
about the child's home, and appearance to put
them in groups and seating. The fast learners
'tigers' tended to be M/C and had a neat
appearance, seated near to the desk/ gave
greatest encouragement. The 'clowns' &
'cardinals'= seated further away / lower level
books/ W/C.
- Interactionist view= children from
different class backgrounds=
labelled differently
- High status and knowledge:
- Keddie (1971)- found both pupils and knowledge can be labelled
as high or low status. Streamed by ability & the same course. She
found the top class were given abstract knowledge, theoretical,
high status knowledge. Whereas the bottom group were given
descriptive, common-sense, low status knowledge. The
withholding of high status knowledge from W/C= increases class
differences in achievement.
- Gilbourn & Yodel (2001)-
teachers use notions of
ability to decide which
children have the ability to
get 5 A*-C. They found W/C
& black pupils= more likely
to be perceived as not
having the ability to do so=
put in lower sets/ lower
tiers.
- Keddie (1971)- found both pupils and knowledge can be labelled
as high or low status. Streamed by ability & the same course. She
found the top class were given abstract knowledge, theoretical,
high status knowledge. Whereas the bottom group were given
descriptive, common-sense, low status knowledge. The
withholding of high status knowledge from W/C= increases class
differences in achievement.
- :)- useful in showing interactions within schools and class
inequalities- not neutral institutions.
- :(- Accused of determinism- assumes those with negative labels have no
choice but to fulfil the SFP. Fuller shows that this is not true.
- :(- It ignores wider structures within power, it blames teachers, but fails to
explain why they label.
- :(- Marxists argue that labels are not just because of teacher's prejudices, but the fact
that schools produce class divisions.
- :(- Marxists argue that labels are not just because of teacher's prejudices, but the fact
that schools produce class divisions.
- :(- It ignores wider structures within power, it blames teachers, but fails to
explain why they label.
- :(- Accused of determinism- assumes those with negative labels have no
choice but to fulfil the SFP. Fuller shows that this is not true.
Quer criar seus próprios Mapas Mentais gratuitos com a GoConqr? Saiba mais.