Race or Poverty?which is the largest contributing factor to life outcomes?

[debs]

Professor Sir Michael Marmot, the Director of the Institute of Health equity was asked by the govt to do a report on this in Feb 2010. Its called 'Fair Society, Healthy Lives' ...worth a look.Why they commissioned it but dont act on it is beyond me!

[motorbird83]

Thanks! I'll have a look

[Undisputedtruth]

motorbird83 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> That's interesting Undisputedtruth. What exactly

> about his background do you think contributed to

> him not living up to his potential. I'm just

> curious what made you feel that way.

>

I went to a state school where most of the pupils came from an Afro-Caribbean background. I think there was an issue in how teachers engaged those pupils.

[motorbird83]

Really, that's interesting given how much it appears teacher's expectations can influence children's achievement. Hopefully, things are somewhat better than when you were in school but there are recent reports that suggest that is not the case.

[uncleglen]

Parents' expectations also influence children's achievement and it is well known amongst teachers that Asian students have strict home rules about school work and these students succeed. Since in some areas of the UK there are families of 3rd generation benefit claimants and therefore the children have never lived with anyone who has had a job, where do these children acquire a work ethic or aspirations?

[artdoglondon]

As regards to the original query, although I can not direct you to a particular study, I do believe it is accepted in most bonafide academic circles that underachievement is about poverty and poverty alone. There is a very good film you may want to watch called "Waiting for Superman" about the educational system in the USA which I think demonstrates this point extremely well.

[Huguenot]

What the racists see is a correlation between poverty and skin colour and assume causation.

It's tiresome, because those who want to create a skin colour based solution to poverty can't believe that they're simply being racist - mainly because they feel that they're trying to do good.

[kirsun]

Uncleglen has inheritantly hit the nail with the hammer. Social and economic conditions cannot always be the blame for all the states that are mentioned. Family and upbringing are what all socio-anylists seem to forget.

We provide a structure of life for all that is free, or in certain cases low cost, and this is what is expected. Yet we expose life as easy going and without the struggles that many endure. One should not expect for things one should work for them, this is undemental animal behaviour.

This giving of free living, easy lifestyles, and expectancy has given rise to a wanten and demanding society that all expect they are entitled too.

Values have thus been forgotton, and to catagorise this as race and colour is wrong, it can only be catagorised as family values, and how we can keep and respect these. This is what is lacking and parents in all their attempts, whether right and wrong encourage this, by doing things beyound their means for their children, whithout expressing their circumstances.

I know many people would site me as wrong and old fashioned, but you have to look at the past and realise we lived life how we could afford, and be happy with that.

The culture we provide our kids, is expect things as the government will give it to you.

Little facts can be attained by the studies of racial tendancies to crime, because all I see is whether you are white, black, brown, the crime stems from wanton needs.

Discipline and nurturing of the family is the a good step forward, and can assist in future development of a child's mental state.

I have seen parents argueing with a techer because the teacher told the lady's sone off. What does that give the impression to the child? The child hit another child, yet the parent has totally diregared and undermined the authority of the techer in front of the child.

Sorry I am rambling now, but I feel strongly about family values.

[motorbird83]

I know what you mean uncleglen and I there is research to suggest you are right. That's a very tough issue to address though. The only thing I can think of is developing mentoring networks targeting the poor but I wonder if people wouldn't find that offensive... Regarding the rich poor gap there is a very controversial book out at the moment in the US that essentially encourages the affluent to reconnect with the less well-off and essentially teach working class people "good values". As you can imagine, suggesting that the poor are poor because they have bad values is really offensive to a lot of people. Still, somehow, setting up an alternative model for young people via a mentoring program should be a good idea based on the research... I am actually looking into that specifically at the moment.

[BB100]

motorbird83 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> appears teacher's expectations can influence

> children's achievement. Hopefully, things are

> somewhat better than when you were in school but

> there are recent reports that suggest that is not

> the case.

uncleglen: Parents' expectations also influence children's achievement and it is well known amongst teachers that Asian students have strict home rules about school work and these students succeed.

At last some sensible discussion on the question. I have done some research on this issue over the years and the answer is complex as a range of factors together influence life outcomes. Poverty is the biggest factor but race, culture, health, mental health, geographical location, quality of education, social and human capital, the child's personality, parental support, teacher's expectations, values and beliefs, belonging to a faith organisation etc, etc, all contribute. It is the reason why children of the same family who go to the same school can have different life outcomes.

However, Cameron, judging from his pre-election speeches on education is working on the idea that it is not what you HAVE that makes a difference to social mobility but what families DO.He pointed to examples of poorer families whose children have been successful in the education system and celebrates how they 'made it' without throwing money at them. However, this is a small percentage of families who have been resilient to the factors and kinda ignores the disabling impact poverty has. It's like those 100 year old smokers saying 'look at me I'm 100 and smoking done me no harm'.

[Huguenot]

No BB100 - race does not contribute. The colour of your skin is a genetic factor that has no influence on intellectual development.

You are confusing race with culture, a confusion that can only be made by someone who judges others based on their skin colour.

"it is well known amongst teachers that Asian students have strict home rules about school work and these students succeed"

That judgement could only be made by racist teachers. Teachers who draw that conculsion should be lucky to keep their jobs and would be appropriate subjects for retraining.

The only thing that teachers know is that students who are subject to strict home rules about school work tend to be more successful. It may well be that these traits tend to manifest themselves more openly in collectivist cultures - but it is not appropriate to draw the conclusion that they have yellow skin and consequently must discipline their children.

[BB100]

Sorry Huguenot I ran out of time and so didn't really read through my last past. I meant not the colour of your skin but racism that is the factor - an external factor rather than internal. My apologies for rushing my post.

I spent a large portion of my first-class degree researching the obstacles and factors that influence educational achievement. There is a great deal of research evidence that suggests that certain children from some ethnic backgrounds do better than others for a variety of reasons. There is also research on how many white people will do better at IQ tests because they are designed by white people with a similar pattern of thinking and culture - not because others are cognitively deficit.

The question in the OP is a broad one that requires more than the scope of this thread can handle. But I'm rushing again....

[Huguenot]

Sorry, I was a bit harsh.

Collectivist thinking has an incredible impact on development and expectations - I'm an evil ad man working in SE Asia, and it has a tremendous influence of marketing communications.

I suspect that the 'discipline' idea that you refer to has more to do with social obligation rather than discipline in an Anglo Saxon sense.

Most activities and behaviours are efectively a transaction with society, to fail to live up to your academic potential is perceived as 'ripping off' one's family - and exposure means shame, embarrassment and humiliation. Most of us would work hard to avoid that.

It's not so much discipline that drives application to homework, more a sense of pride and debt.

However, this isn't necessarily a good thing. It wouldn't be acceptable to Anglo Saxons who set great store by personal freedoms and self-actualisation (you do yourself re. Remembrance for example).

It often results in people failing to meet their own potential, as they work hard to meet other people's expectations.

Many people in SE Asia would be described as 'doormats' by their British counterparts.

[Curly]

I found something interesting things on the IOE website including this: http://www.ioe.ac.uk/newsEvents/33035.html

A controversial book which argues that racism in the English education system is still restricting the academic achievements of countless minority ethnic children has won the UK's most prestigious education research award.

Racism and Education: Co-incidence or Conspiracy?, by Professor David Gillborn of the Institute of Education, University of London, has been named as the outstanding education book of the year by the Society for Educational Studies. Professor Gillborn will receive the ?2,000 prize at a ceremony in London tomorrow (Thursday, November 5).

In his book, published by Routledge, he dissects the effects of racism across the education system ? from national policies to school-level decisions about exclusions and ability grouping. The principal victims, he contends, are black pupils. They are more likely to be placed in lower-ability groups, more likely to be entered for lower-tier GCSEs that prevent them achieving the top grades and, as is well documented, far more likely to be excluded.

"There is compelling evidence that the over-representation of black Caribbean students in exclusions is the result of harsher treatment by schools, rather than simple differences in behaviour," says Professor Gillborn, who also won the Society's book prize nine years ago.

He acknowledges that pupils in all the major ethnic groups in England are much more likely to achieve five or more higher-grade GCSEs than they were 20 years ago. However, he points out that black pupils and children of Pakistani and Bangladeshi heritage have not caught up with other ethnic groups.

"The history of education in this country suggests that the 'assessment game' is rigged to such an extent that if black children succeed as a group, despite the odds being stacked against them, it is likely that the rules will be changed to re-engineer failure," Professor Gillborn says.

He realises this claim will sound literally incredible to many people but cites the example of baseline assessments, which used to be set on entry to primary school. In 2000, Professor Gillborn and Professor Heidi Mirza discovered that black children in one very large authority were achieving the highest grades in these tests.

That form of assessment has, however, been replaced by the Foundation Stage Profile, which is dependent on teachers' assessments at the end of the reception year. Following the change of assessment method, young black children are now said to be underachieving.

"I have no evidence that the changes in England were manufactured deliberately," he says. "However, the changes are clearly racist in their outcome. A new assessment system for five-year-olds appears to have erased, virtually overnight, the only part of the system where black children were relatively successful."

Professor Gillborn says that he is often told that the academic success of "model minorities", namely Indian and Chinese pupils, demonstrates that the English education system is not racist. He rejects this argument.

"Although Indian and Chinese students undoubtedly face racism, sometimes of the most vicious kind, it is not the case that they are just as likely to come from poor backgrounds as black students or other lower-achieving ethnic groups," he says. "Indian students are the most likely to be educated privately: at twice the white rate and five times the rate for black students."

Race inequality in education persists because social and education policy has never seriously prioritised its eradication, Professor Gillborn concludes. "Rather, policymakers have paid more attention to social control, assimilation, and pandering to the feelings and fears of white people," he adds. "Most shocking of all, in key respects the contemporary situation is as bad, and in some cases worse, than anything that has gone before."

[Huguenot]

He's just trying to sell a book.

He asks whether it's a 'conspiracy' and then affirms "I have no evidence that the changes in England were manufactured deliberately"

Well that's not a conspiracy then is it?

His comments about Indian and Chinese students enforce the prejudice: "Indian students are the most likely to be educated privately: at twice the white rate and five times the rate for black students."

He's trying to extrapolate from the macro to the individual scale, whilst implicitly recognising that not evey student of a particular colour is advantaged. Ergo skin colour does not predict any particular outcome.

"A new assessment system for five-year-olds appears to have erased, virtually overnight, the only part of the system where black children were relatively successful."

This appears to assume malice aforethought in complete contradiction to his earlier statement.

It's poor academic logic, and rabble rousing to boot.

[uncleglen]

Huguenot: The 'judgement' as you call it is made from years of observation and conclusions are allowed to be drawn from empirical evidence.For example. In my first ever teaching post I had problems with a young Asian lad, and sought the advice of my head of department. He spoke to the lad and said he was going to phone home- the lad practically begged him with tears included, not to, and asked for another chance. This teacher said he knew that would do the trick as Asian parents are strict. Since then I have observed this to be very common, and I have also observed that Cinese pupils are very studious and actually joke about how strict their mothers are. My own parents are from immigrant families and I had a strict upbringing also- my parents always backed the school and I would never tell them if I had been in trouble (very rare)or I would have been disciplined twice. I brought mine up in the same way.

[Huguenot]

Excellent - could they tell that from the colour of your skin?

[Huguenot]

Is this the same years of empirical evidence that tells you black men are criminals, the Irish are terrorists and the chinese are untrustworthy?

Way to go, uncleglen.

[Huguenot]

[uncleglen]

This is still to do with 'family' (or not)and upbringing. I forgot to mention that my family was poor. Interesting to note that because of political correctness in school, it was practically impossible to get anything right. If you disproportionately (as a ratio of students being disciplined) disciplined black students you were racist; if you did not discipline them for fear of being accused of discriminating against them- you were being racist for treating them differently. So you were damned if you did and damned if you didn't.

Another interesting thing that trainee teachers were told at the time was that if you were a woman teacher trying to discipline a black lad it will have no effect because they are used to being told what to do by their mothers all the time( no fathers present-apparently) and they will ignore you!

The whole thing is a minefield and we just teach our subjects, keep our heads down, try our best to be pc and hope for the- or get out and do something else!

[Huguenot]

"trainee teachers were told at the time was that if you were a woman teacher trying to discipline a black lad it will have no effect because they are used to being told what to do by their mothers all the time"

No uncleglen, if that was taught then you need to challenge this. I do not believe that was ever taught.

It's simply racism, and I'm not sure what teacher training course would accept this.

[motorbird83]

uncleglen,if you were really told the things you claim this is very worrying. As you mentioned, parental attitudes towards education are powerful and can overcome disadvantages that normally are strong predictors of academic achievement (such as poverty). However, teachers' prejudices are also significant. If a teacher comes into a classroom with preconceived ideas regarding pupils based on race or cultural background, that teacher is doing a huge disservice to the students. The subtle bigotry of low expectations (even if those low expectations spring from an assumption that the student's parents don't care about their education) has a real and measurable impact on student performance, all things being equal. Newly qualified teachers should be required to read "Pygmalion in the classroom: teacher expectations and pupils' intellectual development". Below is a link discussing recent research on the topic. http://www.ntlf.com/html/pi/9902/pygm_1.htm

BB100-- the issue about Cameron is tough. I agree that the fact that a strong family focus on education and achievement can overcome certain disadvantages such as poverty, doesn't mean that its a level playing field for poor children. The disadvantages posed by poverty are still obstacles to be overcome and therefore still need to be addressed. Cameron's point though that if someone wants to be successful then they can in England despite certain social disadvantages has some truth. The question then is how do you get children caught in a pattern of generational underachievement to want to be successful, particularly if their parents don't instil them with those values and teachers have low expectations of them.

One of my friends is a teacher out in Essex and she tells me that students as young as 14 are planning to have children to get council housing. Its the only ambition they have for their lives and they don't even contemplate that there could be more as its all they know... I find this incredibly sad and such a waste of talent. Its our responsibility as a society to figure out how to break these kinds of patterns but the solutions are not simple. Its a combination of tackling low-expectations students have for themselves as well as institutional expectations of them. Recent studies in the US also show that the variety of cultural and social experiences affluent children are exposed to from infancy have a positive impact on their cognitive development.

[uncleglen]

Huguenot-I said we were told it (by experienced teachers in the training schools) not taught it- quite different. Sorry if that was not clear.

You are right motorbird83 about the waste of talent and impoverishment of aspiration.A psychologist friend and I were discussing that the way that children are brought up now- much less discipline and lack of real stimulation, could have resulted in under-development of the parts of the brain responsible for self -control and self- regulation and emotional development.

[Huguenot]

If you were told it by a teacher then you were 'taught' it. That's what the word means.

Logic chopping doesn't get away from the fact that this is simply ugly racism. It's also a form racism that has a dramatic and destructive effect on the development and achievements of children.

You think it's not racism if you believe it's true. This is racist.

[Didi2]

both have a huge effect in it. depends on the person and how indivisualy he can think .