In-School Processes

The AQA specification identifies "relationships and processes within schools" as a separate topic, requiring you to bring together and deepen your understanding of internal factors across class, ethnicity, and gender. This lesson consolidates and extends the analysis of labelling, the self-fulfilling prophecy, streaming, pupil subcultures, pupil identities, the hidden curriculum, institutional racism, and the effects of marketisation on in-school processes. You must be able to analyse how these processes interact to produce differential outcomes for different groups of pupils.

Key Definition: In-school processes refer to the interactions, relationships, structures, and institutional practices within educational settings that shape pupils' experiences, identities, and ultimately their educational outcomes.

---

Labelling Theory in Depth

Labelling theory, rooted in the interactionist tradition, argues that teachers' perceptions and classifications of pupils have a powerful impact on their educational outcomes. The key insight is that labels are not neutral descriptions of pupils' abilities — they are social constructions that reflect teachers' assumptions about social class, ethnicity, and gender.

How Labels Are Constructed

Becker (1971) showed that teachers construct an image of the "ideal pupil" and judge all pupils against this standard. The ideal pupil is typically middle class in appearance, manner, and attitude: well spoken, well dressed, attentive, and compliant. Pupils who do not match this image — disproportionately working-class and ethnic minority pupils — are more likely to receive negative labels.

Dunne and Gazeley (2008) found that teachers routinely attributed working-class underachievement to home background and lack of parental support, treating it as inevitable and beyond the school's control. By contrast, they attributed middle-class underachievement to temporary factors (e.g., illness, emotional problems) that could be addressed. This differential attribution meant that schools invested more effort in helping middle-class underachievers, while working-class underachievement was normalised and accepted.

Hempel-Jorgensen (2009) showed that the definition of the "ideal pupil" varies between schools in different social contexts. In schools serving disadvantaged communities, the ideal pupil was defined primarily in terms of behaviour (being quiet, obedient, not causing trouble). In middle-class schools, the ideal pupil was defined in terms of academic engagement (asking questions, being creative, showing intellectual curiosity). This means that working-class pupils are judged on a narrower, behaviour-focused criterion, while middle-class pupils are encouraged to develop the higher-order thinking skills valued by the examination system.

---

The Self-Fulfilling Prophecy Revisited

The Rosenthal and Jacobson (1968) study (see Lesson 3) demonstrated the positive self-fulfilling prophecy. But the negative self-fulfilling prophecy may be even more significant for understanding inequality:

1. A teacher labels a pupil as "less able" or "unlikely to succeed" — often based on class, ethnicity, or gender rather than actual ability.
2. The teacher unconsciously adjusts their behaviour: providing less challenging work, asking fewer questions, offering less encouragement, tolerating lower standards.
3. The pupil internalises the low expectations, develops a lower academic self-concept, and reduces their effort.
4. The pupil underachieves, confirming the teacher's original prediction.

However, it is essential to recognise that the self-fulfilling prophecy is not inevitable. Fuller (1984) showed that some pupils actively reject negative labels and use them as motivation to succeed. Mirza (1992) found similar patterns among Black Caribbean girls. Mac an Ghaill (1992) documented how some Black and Asian sixth-form students developed strategies to manage and resist racist labelling. The self-fulfilling prophecy is therefore a tendency, not a law.

---

Streaming, Setting, and Differentiation

The Impact of Ability Grouping

Ability grouping — whether through streaming (fixed groups for all subjects) or setting (groups for individual subjects) — is one of the most significant in-school processes affecting achievement. Research consistently shows that:

• Working-class pupils are disproportionately placed in lower streams/sets, even when their prior attainment is similar to middle-class pupils placed in higher groups.
• Black Caribbean pupils are disproportionately placed in lower sets (Gillborn & Youdell, 2000).
• Pupils in lower streams receive a qualitatively different educational experience: less demanding work, lower teacher expectations, less experienced teachers, and more emphasis on control rather than learning.

Keddie (1971) observed that teachers offered different types of knowledge to pupils in different streams. Pupils in higher streams received "elaborated" knowledge — more abstract, theoretical, and critical. Pupils in lower streams received "common-sense" knowledge — more practical, concrete, and restricted. This differentiated curriculum meant that lower-stream pupils were denied access to the kind of knowledge needed for examination success.

Polarisation and Subculture Formation

As Lacey (1970) demonstrated, streaming leads to polarisation — the formation of opposing pro-school and anti-school subcultures. Pupils in top streams are rewarded with positive labels, teacher attention, and a sense of success, reinforcing their commitment to school values. Pupils in bottom streams experience failure, rejection, and negative labelling, leading some to form anti-school subcultures that provide an alternative source of status and identity.

Hargreaves (1967) identified similar processes in a secondary modern school, where pupils in the lowest streams developed a delinquent subculture that valued toughness, defiance, and anti-school behaviour.

---

Pupil Identities

Schools are not just places of learning — they are sites where pupils' identities are formed, negotiated, and contested. Identity refers to an individual's sense of who they are, and it is shaped by interactions with teachers and peers within the school context.

Class Identity

Archer et al. (2010) found that working-class pupils often experienced a conflict between their class identity and the identity required for educational success. Being a "successful learner" was associated with middle-class characteristics (being articulate, confident, having "high culture" interests), which felt alien to working-class pupils. Some responded by constructing "Nike identities" — investing in branded clothing and consumer culture to establish status and self-worth outside of academics.