Education Revision Guide Education Revision Topics Click on

Education Revision Guide

Education Revision Topics Click on the links to access your chosen revision topic • Class Differences in Achievement EXTERNAL FACTORS INTERNAL FACTORS • Ethnic Differences in Achievement • Gender Differences in Achievement EXTERNAL FACTORS INTERNAL FACTORS SUBJECT CHOICE • Roles/Functions of Education FUNCTIONALISTS • Perspectives on Education NEW RIGHT FEMINISTS INTERACTIONISTS NEW LABOUR RECENT POLICIES • Education Policy and Inequality MAIN PHASES • Education Exam Questions MARXISTS ITEM A Q - 01 Q - 02 Q - 03 Q - 04

Class differences in achievement External Factors To Contents MATERIAL FACTORS Diet and Health Housing Financial Support & Cost of Education CULTURAL FACTORS Intellectual Development Language CULTURAL CAPITAL Attitudes and Values

Class differences in achievement Internal Factors To Contents LABELLING THEORY Primary Schools Secondary Schools High & Low Status Knowledge SELF-FULFILLING PROPHECY Teacher Expectations Streaming and S. F. P PUPIL SUBCULTURES Differentiation & Polarisation Abolishing Streaming Other Pupil Responses MARKETISATION AND SELECTION POLICIES A-C Economy & Educational Triage Competition and Selection

Ethnic differences in achievement External Factors MATERIAL DEPRIVATION & CLASS Housing Diet and Health Financial Support & Cost of Education To Contents CULTURAL DEPRIVATION Intellectual and Linguistic Skills Family structure and Parental Suport RACISM IN WIDER SOCIETY Attitudes and Values Causes Poverty

Ethnic differences in achievement To Contents Internal Factors LABELLING & TEACHER RACISM PUPIL RESPONSES & SUBCULTURES THE ETHNOCENTRIC CURRICULUM INSTITUTIONAL RACISM SELECTION & SEGREGATION

Gender differences in achievement External Factors The Impact of Feminism Changes in the Family Changes in Women’s Employment To Contents Girls’ Changing Ambitions

Gender differences in achievement Internal Factors WHY DO BOYS UNDERACHIEVE? To Contents WHY DO GIRLS DO BETTER? Boys & Literacy Globalisation & The Decline of traditional Men’s jobs Equal Opportunities Policies Positive role models In schools Feminisation Of Education Shortage of Male Primary School Teachers GCSE & coursework Teacher attention & Classroom interaction Challenging Stereotypes in the Curriculum Selection and League Tables ‘Laddish’ subcultures

Subject Choice & Gender Identity Differences Between Girls & Boys To Contents Subject Choice Early Socialisation Gendered Subject Images Peer Pressure Gendered Career Opportunities Gender Identity Verbal Abuse Male Peer Groups The Male Gaze Teachers & Discipline Double Standards

Roles/Functions of Education Functionalists Parsons Durkheim SOCIAL SOLIDARITY SPECIALIST SKILLS MERITOCRACY Davis & Moore To Contents ROLE ALLOCATION

Roles/Functions of Education New Right To Contents Chubb & Moe FRAMEWORK OF COMPETITION CONSUMER CHOICE TRANSMISSION OF SHARED CULTURE

Roles/Functions of Education Marxists Bowles & Gintis Althusser Ideological State Apparatus MYTH of MERITOCRACY HIDDEN CURRICULUM CORRESPONDANCE PRINCIPLE Reproduction of Inequality Legitimation of Inequality Willis To Contents ROLE ALLOCATION

Perspectives on Education To Contents Feminists Liberal Radical Positive changes so far – moving towards meritocracy Education system still Patriarchal

Perspectives on Education Interactionists To Contents MICRO Interactions between pupils & teachers Teachers affect Self-esteem Teachers play Crucial role in Students’ success

Education Policy and Inequality The Main Phases The Tripartite System The Comprehensive System Reproduction of Inequality To Contents Marketisation & Parentocracy Exam League Tables Funding Formula Myth of Parentocracy

Education Policy and Inequality To Contents To more recent policies New Labour Policies Reducing Inequality Promoting Diversity & Choice • EAZ • Aim Higher • EMA • School til 18 • Specialist Schools • Academies Postmodernism & New Labour Policies Relating To Gender & Ethnicity • GIST • WISE • Assimilation • Multi-cultural Ed. • Social Inclusion

Material Deprivation Studies • Howard (2001) – People from poorer homes have lower intake of vitamins & energy which affects concentration • Ridge (2002) – Children in poverty take on jobs which impacts on education

Evaluation of Material Deprivation • Cultural Factors – Intellectual Development – Language – Attitudes & Values • Internal (In-school) Factors and Processes – – Labelling & S. F. P Pupil subcultures Setting & Streaming Marketisation & Selection Policies BACK

Cultural Deprivation Studies • Douglas (1964) – w/c parents less likely to stimulate intellectual development by reading at home etc. • Bernstein (1975) – Speech codes • Hyman (1967) – W/c beliefs are ‘self-imposed barrier to success’ • Sugarman (1970) – Working class subculture: Fatalism/collectivism/immediate gratification/present-time orientation

Evaluation of Cultural Deprivation • Keddie (1973) – ‘Myth of Cultural Deprivation’ w/c not culturally deprived – they have their own culture • Material Factors – Housing – Diet & Health – Financial Support & the Cost of Education • Internal (In-school) Factors and Processes – – Labelling & S. F. P Pupil subcultures Setting & Streaming Marketisation & Selection Policies BACK

Cultural Capital Studies • Bourdieu (1984) – 3 types of Capital: Cultural, Educational, Economic • Gewirtz (1995) – Those with higher cultural capital more likely to benefit from marketisation and increased parental choice.

Evaluation of Cultural Capital • Sullivan (2001) – Pupils with greater cultural capital more likely to succeed at GCSE – BUT… w/c pupils with same level of cultural capital still did worse – SO… Cultural capital cannot be the only factor to blame for differences in educational achievement BACK

Labelling Studies • Becker (1971) – Ideal pupil • Cicourel and Kitsuse (1963) – Educational Counsellors • Ray Rist (1970) – Tigers, Cardinals and Clowns • Gillborn and Youdell (2001) – W/C and black pupils more likely to be perceived as low ability and put in low sets • Keddie (1971) – High and Low Status Knowledge in different sets

Evaluation of Labelling theory • Too deterministic – Assumes pupils have no choice but to fulfil labels • Fuller (1984) – Black girls who rejected negative labels and succeeded • Marxists BACK – Labelling theory ignores wider structures of power – inequality of education system to blame for w/c underachievement, not teachers/labels themselves.

Self Fulfilling Prophecy Studies • Rosenthal & Jacobsen (1968) – Teacher Expectations – the spurters • Douglas – Children in low streams IQ declines, but in high streams IQ improves

Evaluation of Labelling theory • Too deterministic – Assumes pupils have no choice but to fulfil labels • Fuller (1984) – Black girls who rejected negative labels and succeeded • Marxists BACK – Labelling theory ignores wider structures of power – inequality of education system to blame for w/c underachievement, not teachers/labels themselves.

Pupil Subculture Studies • Lacey (1970) – Differentiation and Polarisation – proschool and anti-school subcultures • Hargreaves (1967) – Delinquent subculture – helped guarantee failure • Woods (1979) – Ingratiation, ritualism, retreatism, rebellion

Evaluation of Pupil Subcultures • Furlong (1984) – Students respond differently with different teachers BACK

Material Deprivation & Class Studies • Flaherty (2004) – Pakistani and Bangladeshi’s more likely to suffer from poverty and related material deprivation BACK

Cultural Deprivation Studies • Bereiter & Engelmann – Language of low-income black American families inadequate for educational success • Moynihan (1965) – Black lone parent families – no father figure leads to lack of care as mother has to work • Driver and Ballard (1981) – Asian family structures bring educational benefits

Evaluation of Cultural Deprivation • Swann Report (1985) – Language not a major factor in under-achievement. • Driver (1977) – Cultural deprivation theory ignores positive effects of ethnicity on achievement • Lawrence (1982) – Black pupils fail because of racism not weak culture • Keddie – Cultural deprivation is a victim-blaming theory. BACK

Labelling & Teacher Racism Studies • Gillborn and Youdell (2000) – Teacher’s racialised expectations of black pupils BACK • Wright (1992) – Ethnocentrism leads to teachers treating asian pupils differently

Pupil responses & subcultures • Fuller (1984) – Rejection of negative labels • Mac an Ghaill (1992) – Labelling does not always produce self-fulfilling prophecy • Mirza (1992) – 3 types of teacher racism: colour-blind, liberal chauvinists, overt-racists • Sewell (1988) – Rebels, conformists, retreatists, innovators

Evaluation of labelling and pupil responses • Mirza – Strategies devised to avoid teacher racism may limit opportunities • Danger of blaming teacher racism, and ignoring wider problems within wider society. BACK

The ethnocentric curriculum studies • Troyna and Williams (1986) – British curriculum gives priority to white culture • Ball (1994) BACK – National curriculum promotes ‘little Englandism’ • Coard (2005) – British history lessons undermine self-esteem of ethnic minority pupils

Institutional Racism Studies • Troyna and Williams – Schools and colleges routinely discriminate against ethnic minorities BACK • Hatcher (1996) – School governing bodies give race issues low priority and do not deal with racist behaviour

Selection and Segregation Studies • Gillborn (1997) – Marketisation has given schools more scope for selection putting minorities at a BACK disadvantage • The Commission for Racial Equality (1993) – Racist school admission procedures mean ethnic minorities end up in poorer schools

Impact of Feminism Studies • Mc. Robbie (1994) – Comparison of girls magazines from 70’s and 90’s BACK

Changes in the Family • • • Increase divorce rate Increase in co-habitation Decrease in first marriages Increase in lone-parent families Smaller families BACK

Changes in Women’s employment • • 1970 Equal Pay Act More women in employment Pay gap has decreased Women now breaking through ‘glass ceiling’ BACK

Girls’ changing ambitions studies • Sharpe (1994) – Comparison of interviews on girls ambitions from 70’s and 90’s • Francis (2001) BACK – Girls had high ambitions – few saw future in traditional ‘female’ jobs.

Early socialisation studies • Norman (1988) – Boys and girls treated differently according to sex • Byrne (1979) – Teachers encourage different behaviours • Murphy and Elwood (1998) – Different tastes in reading lead to different subject choices • Browne and Ross (1991) – Gender domains BACK

Gendered subject images studies • Kelly (1988) – Science seen as boys subject • Colley (1998) – Computer studies seen as masculine • Df. ES (2007) – Pupils as single sex schools hold less stereotyped subject images BACK

Peer Pressure studies • Paetcher (1998) – Girls who choose sport have to go against stereotype • Dewar (1990) – Male students call sporty girls butch or lesbian BACK

Boys and Literacy studies • DCSF (2007) – Gender gap is down to boys’ poorer literacy & language skills BACK

Feminisation of education studies • Sewell – Boys fall behind as education has become feminised BACK

Shortage of male primary school teachers studies • Df. ES (2007) – Men make up only 16% of primary school teachers • Yougov (2007) – 42% of 8 -11 boys say male teachers make them work harder BACK • Francis (2006) – 2/3 of 7 -8 year olds say teacher gender makes no difference

‘Laddish’ subcultures studies • Epstein (1998) – W/C boys likely to be bullied and subject to homophobic abuse if they are seen as ‘swots’ BACK • Francis (2001) – Boys more worried about being swots than girls

Equal opportunities policies studies • Boaler (1998) – Impact of equal opp’s policies main reason for change in girls’ achievement BACK

Positive role models in schools studies • Df. ES (2007) – Increase in numbers of female teachers and head teachers BACK

GCSE and Coursework studies • Gorard (2005) – Gender gap was constant until introduction of coursework • Mitsos and Browne (1998) BACK – Girls better at coursework than boys as more conscientious

Teacher attention studies • Spender (1983) – Teachers spend more time interacting with boys • French & French (1993) – Boys only received more attention because of reprimands • Francis (2001) – Boys felt picked on and disciplined more harshly • Swann and Graddol (1994) BACK – Way teachers interact with girls more positive as focussed on schoolwork not behaviour • Swann (1998) – Boys dominate whole class discussion – girls better at listening and co-operating

Challenging stereotypes in the curriculum studies • Weiner (1995) – Since 80’s teachers have challenged gender stereotypes in academic resources BACK

Selection and League Tables studies • Jackson (1998) – Girls a better prospect for high achieving schools • Slee (1998) – Boys seen a ‘liability’ students and unattractive to schools because of behaviour problems BACK

Recent Educational Policies • Rise in Tuition Fees • Scrapping of E. M. A. • English Baccalaureate BACK • Check the news for any current changes to the education system – this will be very useful for your exam

Item A • Always read and highlight key parts • Is there to trigger your memory and give you a hook into your essays • You must refer to it • Develop it, but don’t copy it To Contents

Question 01 • 2 Marks available • Define a key term: – E. g. “What is meant by…. ” • Should be one good sentence – NO MORE!! To Contents

Question 02 To Contents • 6 marks available • Suggest or Identify 3 things – No explanation needed – Simple bullet points fine • Don’t waste time by writing loads here!

Question 03 To Contents • 12 marks available • Mini essay – intro and conclusion needed • You need to show some evaluation – i. e. an alternative view/argument

Question 04 • 20 marks available • A good essay will have: – Intro – Main Body – including analysis & evaluation – Conclusion • Stay focused by referring to question throughout • Use the item, but do not rely on it!!! To Contents