Class Differences in Achievement: Internal Factors

While external factors such as material deprivation and cultural capital help explain class differences in educational achievement, sociologists also examine internal factors — processes within the education system itself that contribute to inequality. These include labelling, the self-fulfilling prophecy, streaming and setting, pupil subcultures, and the effects of marketisation and selection policies. Understanding internal factors is essential because they show that schools are not neutral institutions — they actively contribute to the reproduction of class inequality.

Key Definition: Internal factors are processes within schools and the education system — such as labelling, streaming, and selection — that affect pupils' achievement.

---

Labelling

Key Definition: Labelling is the process by which teachers attach a meaning or definition to a pupil based on their perceived characteristics. These labels can be positive (e.g., "bright," "hardworking") or negative (e.g., "troublemaker," "less able") and can significantly influence pupils' educational experiences and outcomes.

Becker: The Ideal Pupil

Howard Becker (1971) conducted interviews with 60 Chicago high school teachers and found that they judged pupils not according to their actual ability or effort but according to how closely they matched the teacher's image of the "ideal pupil." This ideal pupil was typically middle class in appearance, conduct, and attitude — well dressed, polite, obedient, and motivated. Working-class pupils were more likely to be labelled as poorly behaved, lacking motivation, and unlikely to succeed.

Becker's study demonstrated that labelling is a social process — it tells us more about the teacher's expectations and class prejudices than about the pupil's actual ability. Middle-class pupils are more likely to receive positive labels, while working-class pupils are more likely to receive negative ones, regardless of their true potential.

Rist: Labelling in Primary School

Rist (1970) observed an American kindergarten class and found that the teacher used information about the children's home background and appearance (rather than any assessment of ability) to place them at different tables. Children from middle-class, well-groomed backgrounds were placed at the table nearest to the teacher ("tigers") and received the most attention and encouragement. Children from poorer backgrounds were placed furthest away ("clowns") and were given less attention. These initial labels, assigned within the first eight days of school, became the basis for the children's future educational careers.

Evaluation of Labelling

Strengths:

• Highlights how teacher expectations are shaped by class bias, not just pupil ability.
• Supported by extensive research evidence (Becker, Rist, Rosenthal & Jacobson).
• Shows that inequality is partly produced within schools, not just imported from outside.

Limitations:

• Labelling theory is deterministic — it implies that once a pupil is labelled, they cannot escape it. In reality, some pupils successfully reject negative labels.
• It focuses on small-scale interactions and may not fully explain the broader structural causes of inequality.
• Fuller (1984) found that black girls who were given negative labels by teachers responded by working harder to prove them wrong, rather than conforming to the label.

---

The Self-Fulfilling Prophecy

Key Definition: The self-fulfilling prophecy occurs when a prediction (such as a teacher's label) becomes true simply because it has been made. The label changes the behaviour of the labelled person, who then acts in ways that confirm the original prediction.

Rosenthal and Jacobson: Pygmalion in the Classroom

Rosenthal and Jacobson (1968) conducted a classic experiment in a California elementary school. They told teachers that certain randomly selected pupils had been identified by a special test as "spurters" — pupils who were about to experience a sudden intellectual growth spurt. In reality, no such test existed and the pupils had been chosen at random.

When the researchers returned a year later, they found that the "spurters" had indeed made significantly greater progress than other pupils — particularly in the younger age groups. The teachers' belief that these pupils were going to improve had led them to treat the pupils differently: giving them more attention, encouragement, and challenging work. The pupils responded to these higher expectations by working harder and achieving more.

This study demonstrates the power of the self-fulfilling prophecy. When teachers believe a pupil is capable, the pupil is more likely to succeed. Conversely, when teachers believe a pupil is limited, they may unconsciously lower their expectations, provide less stimulation, and the pupil's performance may decline — a negative self-fulfilling prophecy.

The Process of the Self-Fulfilling Prophecy

1. The teacher labels a pupil (e.g., as "bright" or "less able") based on class, appearance, or behaviour.
2. The teacher treats the pupil according to the label — giving more or less attention, encouragement, and challenge.
3. The pupil internalises the label and begins to see themselves in terms of it.
4. The pupil's behaviour changes to match the label — they work harder (if labelled positively) or give up (if labelled negatively).
5. The original prediction comes true — the label has become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

---

Streaming and Setting

Key Definition: Streaming is the practice of placing pupils into fixed ability groups for all subjects based on a general assessment of their overall ability. Setting is the practice of placing pupils into ability groups for individual subjects.

Lacey: Differentiation and Polarisation

Lacey (1970) studied Hightown Grammar School and identified two key processes:

1. Differentiation: The process by which teachers categorise pupils according to perceived ability and then place them into streams or sets. Teachers then treat each stream differently — providing more stimulating work to higher streams and more basic, routine work to lower streams.

2. Polarisation: The process by which pupils in different streams respond by developing opposing subcultures. Pupils in top streams tend to develop a pro-school subculture — they are committed to the school's values of hard work and good behaviour. Pupils in lower streams, who feel rejected and labelled as failures, tend to develop an anti-school subculture — they gain status by rejecting school values, misbehaving, and not trying.

Ball: Banding