1. EDUCATION<br />Abraham 1986 found that Maths text books used in a comprehensive school tended to be male dominated.<br />Louise Althuser argues that the economic system has to be reproduced from one generation to the next. In other words, each new generation has to be taught the skills and knowledge and ideas required for them to take up positions in the workplace.<br />Althusser- children learn at school skills and knowledge needed for the workplace.<br />Ball 1990 argues that the impression of choice parents receive is an illusion. In practice, people’s choice is restricted by the limited number of schools available in any area and the class based nature of the system of education.<br />Ball argues that the publication of league tables meant that schools were keen to attract academically able pupils who would boost their results. <br />Ball did not find that working class parents were any less interested in their children’s education than their middle class counterparts. However, they did lack the cultural capital and material resources needed to use the system to their advantage.<br />B. Bernstein 1972 came up with the idea of two codes in the way we speak- restricted code e.g. shorthand speech ‘she saw it’ and the elaborated code e.g. The young girl saw the colourful ball.’ School uses the elaborated code which working class pupils are not used to.<br />Bhatti 1999 found in a study of Asian parents that they were very concerned about their children’s education and many of the girls had ambitious career aspirations. The girls were more likely to leave education because low household income forced them to find paid work than because the family did not value education.<br />Blackledge and Hunt= criticise Willis’ studies saying his study was focused on 12 pupils- you can not generalise and other school subcultures have been ignored. <br />Blackstone and Mortimore 1994- found that working class parents may have less time to visit the school because of demands of their jobs- they are also put off visiting the school by the way teachers interact with them. <br />Bowles and Gintis 1976 education operates in the interests of those who control the work force- capitalist class.<br />Bowles and Gintis found that the students who were more conformist received higher grades than those who were creative and independent.<br />Bowles and Gintis reject the functionalist view that capitalist societies are meritocratic, providing genuine equality of opportunity. The children of the wealthy and powerful obtain high qualifications and well rewarded jobs irrespective of their abilities. The education system disguises it with the myth of meritocracy.<br />Pierre Bourdieu 1986 schools are the natural habitat of the middle and upper classes. They reflect their interests values and beliefs. The working class is like a fish out of water.<br />Bron at al 1997 argues that there is little correspondence between work and education. Much modern work requires team work, while the exam system still stresses individual competition.<br />Bernard Voard 1971- schools make black children feel inferior e.g. west Indian children are told their way of speaking is inferior, the word white is associated with good and black evil and the content of education tends to ignore black people. <br />Colley= 1998 claimed that despite all the social changes in recent decades, traditional definitions of masculinity and femininity still are widespread.<br />Connell- coined the term hegemonic masculinity.<br />Davis and Moore believe that the most talented gain high qualifications which lead to functionally important jobs with high rewards. <br />J. Douglas 1967 stressed the importance of parental attitudes in determining educational success.<br />Dukheim= saw the major function of education as the transmission of society’s norms and values.<br />Durkeim assumes that the norms and values promoted in schools are those of society as a whole rather than those of powerful groups.<br />Eichler: the education system contributed to the way women saw their primary adult role in terms of the private sphere of the family. Traditional assumptions about masculinity and femininity continue to influence both family and work relationships.<br />Feinstein 2002 used data from the National Child Development survey and discovered that the most important factor affecting achievement was the extent to which parents encouraged and supported their children. <br />Becky Francis 2000 argues that gender divisions in terms of subject choice are actually getting stronger with fewer women going on to I.T. and pure science degrees than ten years earlier. <br />Becky Francis 2000 argues that a combination of the career ambitions of girls and the culture of laddish masculinity are the main reasons for females overtaking males in schooling. <br />Fuller 1984 argues against the self fulfilling prophecy- he found that black girls in a comprehensive school resented the negative stereotypes associated with being black and female and tried to prove people wrong.<br />Gaine and George 1999 attack Bernstein’s arguments- they argue there is not a clear working class today and he has oversimplified things. <br />Gilborn and Mirza 2000 argue that African- Caribbean groups get more encouragement than other groups to stay in education.<br />Hargreaves= believes that most schools fail to transmit shared values.<br />D. Hargreaves- and Lacey found sub cultures were academic values are rejected and any form of learning was rejected which the school tried to put forward. <br />S. Harris et al 1993 found that boys are thought to be suffering increasingly from low self esteem and poor motivation, girls are more willing to do homework and spend more time on it and gives give more though to their futures and to the importance of qualifications in achievement of this whereas boys do not seem so concerned. <br />Hasley, Heath and Ridge 1980 showed that a high percentage of working class children 75% left school at the first possible opportunity<br />Kelly 1987 identifies how Science is more masculine- the way the subject is packaged makes them more masculine. The examples used in text books and by teachers tend to be linked to boys’ experiences such as football and cars. <br />Lawton 1989= National Curriculum is too bureaucratic, it centralised power and it did not affect private schools so only the rich were provided with a choice.<br />MacNeil 1988 argued that the National Curriculum was based on white culture and that it excluded cultural imput from ethnic minorities e.g. language component placed emphasis on European languages or in Literature, Black writers were ignored and traditional English writers like Shakespeare were studied. <br />Mac an Ghaill 1994= established 4 different groups: Macho Lads, Academic Achievers, The New Enterprisers and the Real Englishmen.<br />Mac an Ghaill- the Macho lads were into the three F’s!<br />Mac an Ghaill- the Real Englishman were under pressure to be effortless achievers and reject a good work ethic. <br />Mitsos and Browne 1998 said girls have improved due to the women’s movement and feminism having raised their expectations and self esteem of women. Sociologists have drawn attention to some of the disadvantages faced by girls. As a result, equal opportunities programmes have been developed.<br />Mitsos and Browne accept that the boys are underachieving because teachers are less strict with boys, tolerating a lower standard of work and missing of deadlines. Also, boys are more likely to disrupt classes. They are more likely to be sent out of the classroom and expelled from school. <br />Norman (just a bunch of girls) In early years teaching, female roles related to mother /carer are influenced.<br />Norman 1988 argues that before children start school sex stereotyping has begun. <br />Parsons- ‘Education is a bridge’<br />Parsons =‘emancipation of the child from primary attachment to the family.’<br />Parsons ‘ It is fair to give differential rewards for the different levels of achievement, so long as there has been fair access to opportunity and fair that these rewards lead on to higher order opportunities for the successful.’<br />Pilkington 1997 argues that cultural explanations should be treated with caution: There are not clear boundaries between ethnic minority groups. There is a great deal of difference within ethnic minority groups. <br />Rosenthal and Jacobson 1968- (Pygmalion in the classroom) self fulfilling prophecy= conducted a survey in the USA where they pointed out some pupils who should have rapid intellectual growth.<br />Sharpe 1976 found that working class girls were concerned with love marriage, husbands, children, jobs in that order. However, in the 1990s Sharpe repeated the research and found that the girls’ priorities had changed.<br />Smith and Noble 1995 reassert the importance of material factors in influencing class differences in educational achievement e.g. having money allows parents to provide educational toys and books. <br />Smith and Tomlinson 1989 studied 18 comprehensive schools and found that ethnic minority students who went to good schools would do as well as white students in these schools. However they have been criticised as there sample of schools was low and not nationally representative. <br />Spender 1983 argues that the curriculum was still geared towards the needs and interests of boys so to render girls invisible.<br />Spender 1983 claims that male dominance in society is the cause of the girls’ difficulties in education but schools help to reinforce that dominance. <br />Stanworth in 1981 found that A level pupils underestimated girls’ academic performance and teachers saw female futures in terms of marriage<br />Stanworth 1983 found that teachers held stereotypical views of what the female pupils would be doing in the future. <br />Woods-despite the National Curriculum, a gendered curriculum still exists.<br />Mahony 1985 argues that girls are frequently marginalised in the classroom by boys and teachers.<br />Taylor 1981 points out that many teachers are actively concerned to develop a fair policy towards ethnic minority groups.<br />Treneman- Will the boys who can’t read still end up as the men on top? The pay gap between men and women still, for example reveals an average 20% difference over an individual’s lifetime.<br />Toyna and Carrington- 1990 also point out that the r.e. of the national curriculum had to reflect the dominance of the Christian religion.<br />Warrington And Young 2000 claim that male and female aspirations still reflected traditional gender roles<br />Weiner, Arnot and David 1997 are sceptical about the sudden discovery of male underachievement. They say the failure to celebrate girls’ achievement is part of a backlash against female success as men feel threatened by the possibility of women becoming equal. <br />Willis 1977 shows that many pupils do not accept the hidden curriculum in schools. They have little respect for teachers or school rules. <br />Willis 1977 accepts the Marxist view that education is closely linked to the needs of capitalism but he does not believe there is a simple and direct relationship between education and the economy. <br />Willis argues that there is a counter school culture- pupils avoid going to lessons and challenge authority by smoking and misbehaving. Does this really show conformity as described by Bowles and Gintis.<br />Wilkinson- Women’s aspirations and their image of themselves have profoundly altered in the past quarter of a century.’<br />Gordon- although teachers praised girls’ efforts, they reported finding boys more interesting to teach and gave them more time and effort to motivate and retain their attention.<br />