Topic 3 - Ethnic differences in achievement - External factors and ethnic differences in achievement

CD theorists see lack of these skills as major cause of underachievement for many minority children. Argue many children from low-income black families lack intellectual stimulation + enriching experiences. Leaves them poorly equipped for school as haven't been able to develop reasoning + problem solving skills.

Bereiter + Engelmann consider language spoken by low-income black American families inadequate for ed success. Ungrammatical, disjointed + incapable of expressing abstract ideas.

Concern that children who don't speak English at home held back in ed. Official stats shown this not major factor. 2010, pupils w/ English as 1st language only 3.2 points ahead of those without (55.2% to 52%) when it came to gaining 5 A*-C GCSEs inc maths + english.

CD theorists see lack of motivation as major cause of failure of many black children. Mosr socialised into mainstream culture - instils ambition, competitveness + willingness  to make sacrifices necessary to achieve LT goals. Equips them for ed success.

Contrast - CD theorists argue some black children socialised into subculture instils fatalistic, 'live for today' attitude - doesn't value ed + leaves them unequipped for success.

Argue failure to socialise children adequately result of dysfunctional family structure.

Moynihan (1965) - b/c many black families headed by lone mother, children deprived of adequate care b/c has to struggle financially in absence of male breadwinner. Also means boys lack adequate role model of male achievement. M sees cultural deprivation as cucle where inadequatley socialised children from unstable families go on to fail at school + become inadequate parents themselves.

NR - similar. Murray (1984) - high rate lone parenthood + lack of postive male role models -> underachievement of some minorities.

Pryce (1979) - sees family structure as contributing to underachievement of black Caribbean pupils in Britain. Comparison between black Caribbean + Asian pupils, claims Asians higher achievers b/c culture more resistant to racism. Argues difference result of differing impact of colonialism of 2 groups. Experience of slavery - culturally devastating, lost language, religion + family system. 

Sewell (2009) - sees problem as lack of fatherly nurtering - 'tough love' -> black boys finding it hard to overcome emotional + behavioural difficulties of adolescence.

Absence of restraining father -> street gangs of fatherless boys, offer 'perverse loyalty + love'. Present boys w/ media-inspired role model of anti-black masculinity.

Many black boys subject to powerful anti-ed peer group pressure: most academically successful black boys Sewell interviewed felt greatest barrier to success pressure from other boys. Speaking in Standard English + doing well at school often viewed w/ suspicion by peers - seen as 'selling out' to white establishment.

S argues black students do worse than counterparts b/c cultural differences in socialisation + attitudes to ed. Concludes black children need to have greater expectations placed on them to raise aspirations.

Gillbourn (2008) - not peer pressure, but institutional racism w/in ed sys.

Sewell's view, Indian + Chinese pupils benefit from supportive families that have 'Asian work ethic' + place high value on ed.

Lupton (2004) - adult authority in Asian families similar to model that operates in schools. Found respectful behaviour towards adults expected from children. Knock-on effect in school, since parents more likely to be supportive of school behaviour policies.

Often underachieve and have lower aspirations. May be result of lack of parental support.

Eg, Lupton studied 4 mainly w/c schools - 2 mostly white, 1 largely Pakistani community, 4th ethnically mixed community. Found teachers reported poorer levels of behaviour + discipline in white w/c schools (even though they had fewer children on free school meals). Teachers blamed this on lower levelsof parental support + neg attitude white w/c parents had towards education. Ethnic minority parents more likely to see ed as "way up in society".

Main policy that has adopted to tackle cultural deprivation is compensatory education. 

Eg, aim of Operation Head Start in USA to compensate children for cultural deficit they are said to suffer b/c of deprived backgrounds.

Driver (1977) - says it ignores positive effects of ethnicity on achievement. Shows black Caribbean family, far from being dysfunctional, provides girls w/ positive role models of strong independent women. Argues this is why black girls tend to be more successful in education than black boys.

Keddie sees CD as victim-blaming explanation. Argues ethnic minority children are culturally different, not culturally deprived. Under-achieve b/c schools ethnocentric: biased in favour of white culture against minorities.

Critics oppose compensatory ed b/c see it as an attempt to impose dominant white cullture on children who already have coherent culture of their own. Propose 2 alternatives:
 - multicultural ed: policy that recognises + values minority cultures + includes them in curriculum
 - anti-racist ed: a policy that challenges prejudice + discrimination that exists in schools + wider society

MD - lack of physical necessities seen as essential/normal for life in today's society.

MD explanations see ed failure due to factors eg substandard housing + low income. Ethnic minorities more likely to face these problems. Palmer 2012:
 - almost half all ethnic minority children live in low-income housholds against 1/4 white children.
 - ethnic minorities almost twice as likely to be unemployed than white people.

Ethnic minorities more likely to be engaged in shift work. Bangladeshi + Pakistani women more likley to be in low-paid homeworking.

EM's at greater risk of MD because:
 - many live in econ depressed areas w/ high unemployment + low wage rates
 - lack of language skills, + foreign qualifications not recognised by UK employers. More likely to affect recently arrived groups, many refugees. Most members of minority groups fluent in English.

Inequalities reflected in proportion of children from different ethnic groups eligible for FSM. MD explanation argues class diffs explain why Pakistani pupils tend to do worse than Indian + white pupils

Danger may over-estimate effect of poverty + MD if fail to take diff class positions of ethnic groups into account when comparing ed achievements.

Materially deprived Indian + Chinese pupils do better than most. Eg in 2011, 86% Chinese girls who received free school meals achieved 5+ higher grade GCSEs, compared w/ only 65% white girls not receiving free school meals (FSM).

Suggests MD + social class factors don't override influence of ethnicity. eg Modood (2004) found, while children from low-income families generally did less well, effects of low income much less for other ethnic groups than for white pupils.

Rex (1986) - shows how racial discrimination -> social exclusion + how this worsens the poverty faced by ethnic minorities. Eg in housing, discrimination means minorities more likely to be forced into substandard accommodation than white people of same class.

Employment - Wood et al (2010) - 3 closely matched job apps to almost 1000 vacancies. Fake applicants, names associated w/ diff ethnic groups. 1 - white person, 2 members of minority groups. Found only 1 in 16 minority applications offered interview, agains 1 in 9 white applicants.

Helps to explain why members of ethnic minorities more likely to face unemployment + low pay - neg effect on children's ed prospects.