Figure 3: (The Data, 2013, P.2)
![Picture](/uploads/2/7/2/2/27228351/516155540.png?379)
It is argued that social class remains the major predictor for educational outcomes in the UK (Executive Summary, 2010). According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, in 2006, 15.5% of primary school pupils were receiving free school meals and the gap between ‘rich’ and ‘poor’ was greater than in some of the worlds most developed countries (Alexander, 2010). However, within the last few years the attainment gap between the social classes has decreased as seen in figure 3, although the amount of children eligible for FSM has increased. Social class has been found to be one of the most powerful judgements about pupil’s abilities during school (Bartlett and Burton, 2012).
“Social class remains the strongest predictor of educational achievement in the UK, where the social class gap for educational achievement is one of the most significant in the developed world” (Executive Summary, 2010)
Nash (1973) suggested that educational thinking has been concerned with the idea that a child’s attainment and behaviour can be influenced by what they feel their teacher expects of them. Through his research he proposes that teachers developed a level of ‘expectancy’ towards their pupils which tends to be low for working class children and high for middle and upper class children rather than testing their actual ability. Thus, the underestimation of the working class children could potentially define how they achieve during school (Nash, 1973). If a child is not expected to do well during school, this negative label will be internalised thus meaning the child will only achieve which is expected of them - low attainment.
The UK schooling system has a streaming structure which allows teachers to place students into different groups at school according to ability. Educational analyst Pont suggested that streaming by ability enabled a ‘vicious cycle’ where teachers had low expectations of the students streamed into the lowest sets (Study Finds, 2012). It can be argued that students who are streamed into the lower sets are expected less of academically, thus meaning teachers resist pushing them as much as they do the children in the higher sets, furthermore, the students who are streamed into the higher sets may worker harder as they feel they can achieve what is expected of them whereas the lower set pupils are not expected to succeed so will not work as hard as they may be could (Bartlett and Burton, 2012).
Similarly, Bartlett and Burton (2012) agreed that teacher expectations of their pupils limit their achievement. Moreover, Wyness (2008) states that middle class children start school at 3 better equipped with social skills and cognitive development compared to working class children. Consequently, Wyness claims that teachers spend most of their time handling working class children’s behaviour rather then delivering them a formal education. This reinforces the idea that teachers expect less academically of working class children and that they may live up to this label as they are not expected to achieve as high as middle class children.
“Social class remains the strongest predictor of educational achievement in the UK, where the social class gap for educational achievement is one of the most significant in the developed world” (Executive Summary, 2010)
Nash (1973) suggested that educational thinking has been concerned with the idea that a child’s attainment and behaviour can be influenced by what they feel their teacher expects of them. Through his research he proposes that teachers developed a level of ‘expectancy’ towards their pupils which tends to be low for working class children and high for middle and upper class children rather than testing their actual ability. Thus, the underestimation of the working class children could potentially define how they achieve during school (Nash, 1973). If a child is not expected to do well during school, this negative label will be internalised thus meaning the child will only achieve which is expected of them - low attainment.
The UK schooling system has a streaming structure which allows teachers to place students into different groups at school according to ability. Educational analyst Pont suggested that streaming by ability enabled a ‘vicious cycle’ where teachers had low expectations of the students streamed into the lowest sets (Study Finds, 2012). It can be argued that students who are streamed into the lower sets are expected less of academically, thus meaning teachers resist pushing them as much as they do the children in the higher sets, furthermore, the students who are streamed into the higher sets may worker harder as they feel they can achieve what is expected of them whereas the lower set pupils are not expected to succeed so will not work as hard as they may be could (Bartlett and Burton, 2012).
Similarly, Bartlett and Burton (2012) agreed that teacher expectations of their pupils limit their achievement. Moreover, Wyness (2008) states that middle class children start school at 3 better equipped with social skills and cognitive development compared to working class children. Consequently, Wyness claims that teachers spend most of their time handling working class children’s behaviour rather then delivering them a formal education. This reinforces the idea that teachers expect less academically of working class children and that they may live up to this label as they are not expected to achieve as high as middle class children.