A plan for you to use and adapt 💙
** Question from Hectic Teacher
Paragraphs:
- The curriculum
- Teachers
- Setting and streaming
- Selection policies
- Exams
INTRO
Context – AO1
- in school processes and internal factors
Content - AO2
- Lacey, Bartlett, Gillborn and Youdell, Becker
Line of argument – AO3
- impacts some social groups positively and some negatively
PARAGRAPH ONE - THE CURRICULUM
Education reform act (1988) - under the Tories
Brought in the curriculum and made sure all students study the same Also brought in league tables
Educational Triage - Gillborn and Youdell – A-C economy
- Hopeless cases
- C/D borderline
- Those that will pass anyway
The processes that happen because of the curriculum, girls will do better, and boys will be disadvantaged.
This is a process that is seen often within education as part of Bartlett discusses through cream skimming and silt shifting.
Silt shifting for hopeless cases, cream skimming for those who'll pass anyway.
Schools make the judgement of the triage.
PARAGRAPH TWO - SETTING AND STREAMING
Setting and streaming – lacey
Streaming happens often in lower years of education (year 7, one group for all lessons)
Setting happens as a result of ability.
Polarisation – bottom set gets bad grades, top set gets good grades, create a group who is lesser
Differentiation – how teacher support students of different ability
These create pro and anti-school subcultures through polarisation, differentiation, setting and streaming
Fuller – students can reject setting and streaming ideals, and chose not to opt into an anti-school subculture
Group of girls placed in lower sets decided to achieve on their own, influenced but did not create their success.
PARAGRAPH THREE - TEACHERS
Labelling Theory (Becker) teachers label students based on appearance, snap judgement and often linked to past experiences and ‘ideal pupil’ stereotype
Self fulfilling prophecy (Rosenthal and Jacobson) researchers labelling students based on perceived ability, monitored teacher interactions and these perceptions became reality impacting achievement (teacher attention)
Clowns and tigers (Rist) two groups of young students randomly labelled clowns and tigers based on ability, clowns were put further away and given less attention
PARAGRAPH FOUR - EXAMS
Exam tiers, higher and lower papers – lower papers capped at a 1-5 and the higher papers 4-9. Segregated intelligence (Strand) - often ethnic minority groups are placed in the lower exam paper groups and therefore there are lower expectations
New IQism (Gillbourn) teachers decide abilities based on perceptions AND if a certain group do better than anticipated then the boundaries/questions etc will change
INT: Speech Hierarchy (Tryona and Williams) UC – LC – Black Speech
EXT: Bernstein – speech codes
PARAGRAPH FIVE - SELECTION POLICIES
Schools having the power to choose students (Leech and Campos – selection by mortgage) - students who live in a better area = better school – SCHOOLS PICK THEIR CATCHMENT AREA (1970S – COMPREHENSIVIATION)
Moore and Davenport – ethnic segregations in the UK, similar in the UK – applications/interviews, institutional racism
However,... it is not just ethnic groups who experience this, Jackson and Slee found that girls were seen more attractive to schools due to the idea pupil stereotype
We can also AO3 with external factors to counter our argument (importance of internal in our essay)
CONCLUSION
As can be seen through the discussion of internal factors, teachers have a significant impact on student achievement. This could be because of the power the teacher holds or student reactions. Other internal factors influencing achievement are exam tiers as well as setting and streaming students based on ability. This is seen through the work of Gillborn and Youdell and their educational triage as well as Lacey with the pro/anti school subcultures. Therefore, it is fair to conclude that internal factors greatly impact student achievement.
Comments