Racism in Wider Society

• Some sociologists argue that poverty is the product of racism.
• Housing as an example: discrimination means that minorities are more likely to be forced into substandard housing than white people of the same class. 
• This can also be deliberate discrimination in employment.
• This shows why members of ethnic minorities are more likely to face unemployment and low pay. 
• Discrimination in wider society= less employment- lower wage= children are materially and culturally deprived= children don't have access to resourves, live in poor housing= no resources- struggle with work, poor housing- no where to work, illness= students under achieve at school. 

Black pupils in education

• They are a focus group in sociology, due to statistics suggesting that they underachieve the most. 
• Gilborn (1990) and Youdell (2000) studied the impact of teacher labeling on black pupils and labeling in schools. 
• They found that teachers were quicker to discipline black pupils due to teachers having 'racialised expectations'. 
• The teachers misenterpreted their behaviour as threatening or challenging to authority. 
• The pupils responded negatively to teachers and felt that teacher underestimated their ability and picked on them.
• Gillborn and Youdell concluded thatthe conflict between white teachers and black pupils stems from racial stereotypes and not the pupils' behaviour.

Black Pupils in Education continued:

Gillborn and Youdell found that in the 'A-C economy' teachers focus on students that they believe are likely to achieve a grade C at GCSE- 'educational triage' or sorting.

As a result of this, negative stereotypes about black pupils' ability that some teachers have means that they are more likely to be placed in lower sets or streams. 

• Cecile Wright's (1992)  study of a multi-ethnic primary school shows that ASian pupils are a victim of labelling.
• She found that despite the school's apparent commitment to equal opportunities, teachers held ethnocentric views- they took for granted that British culture and standard English were superior.
• For example, teachers assumed that they would have a poor grasp of English and left them out of class discussions or used simplistic, childish language when speaking to them. 
• Asian pupils also felt isolated when teachers expressed disapproval of their customs or mispronounced their names, teachers saw them not as a threat (unlike black pupils), but as a problem they could ignore. The effect was that Asian pupils, especially the girls were marginalised- pushed to the edges and prevented from participating fully.

Louise Archer 2008

Believes that teachers have a dominant discourse (way of seeing things) and this therefore leads them to define pupils from ethnic minorities as lacking the characteristics of the ideal pupil. 

The ideal pupil 

A white middle class masculinised identity with a normal sexuality, this pupil is seen as achieving in the 'right' way through natural ability and initiative. 

The pathologised pupil identity 

An Asian deserving poor feminised identity either asexual or with an oppresseed sexuality. This pupil is seen as 'plodding'. They are conformist and culture bound over-achiever. Someone who succeeds through hardwork rather than natural ability.

The demonised pupil identity 

A black or white, working class, hyper sexualised identity. This pupil is seen as unitelligent, peer-led. They are seen as a culturally deprived under-achiever. 

How do these pupil identities link to ethnicity?

Archer believes that ethnic minority pupils are more likely to be seen as either demonised or pathological pupil identities.

As a result of this, teachers treat pupils of ethnic minorities differently in terms of how they might challenge behaviour etc. 

This will the impact on their feelings around school and ultimately their achievement. 

It depends on whether the teacher has racialised expectations. 

Universities might publish these results based on ethnicity to show that negative stereotypes don't exist.

They can achieve highly.