Sociology of Education

Educational Policies Timeline *1944 Education Act (Butlers Act) -Secondary education free for all pupils up to 15 -Tripartite System set up; Grammar, Secondary, Modern and Technical (Vocational) schools introduced -Allowed for creation of Comprehensive schools; initially only a few were founded -Also direct grant schools; independent schools getting direct grants from the Ministry of Education (as opposed to direct grants to the LEAs Local Education Authorities) -11+ exam to all students at the end of primary school; determined the type of secondary school they went to -Aimed to establish fair and equal meritocracy and improve the economy and society through better-educated citizens -Ultimately wasnt meritocratic; working-class children were unable to go to school as they still had to be an economic asset for their family; 11+ and IQ tests were both unintentionally biased towards those will cultural capital (i.e. the middle-classes); private and direct grant schools were able to secure the best teachers and equipment through their superior funding *1965 - Circular 10/65 - Comprehensivisation -Tripartite system abolished; comprehensive system implemented -LEAs had the decision as to whether or not they would go comprehensive; in theory, it was giving power to the people, with meritocracy in mind -11+ exam abolished in comprehensives (although still effective as late as the present day in some pockets of the Home Counties, e.g. Aylesbury, Bucks) -Students streamed into bands/ sets according to academic ability -Aimed to include all pupils within a local education authority area to attend the same type of school regardless of gender, ethnicity or social class; trying to break down the barriers of differential achievement by social differences and install greater meritocracy -Did significantly narrow the gap between social classes, yet the continuation of independent and private schools still meant that they received the best teachers and equipment, as well as social class evidently having a major influence upon what band/ set a child goes into (more middle-class students in the top sets) -Nearly all new schools were comprehensives *1970 Disabled children no longer considered uneducable; 100% of children

entitled to education *1972 School leaving age upped to 16 -Local Government Act; number of LEAs reduced from 163 to 104 *1973 Post-graduate students no longer eligible for LEA grants *1975 Sex Discrimination Act *1976 Race Relations Act *1979 New Vocationalism -Vocational training introduced in schools; previously focused mainly in the workplace -Aimed to equip students with skills necessary for them to gain employment, thus strengthening the economy through providing a skilled workforce -However, the weakness of the economy was henceforth blamed squarely on education, which overtook responsibility for providing the succeeding skilled workforce generations; not all work-based training was available at schools -Young people were being used as cheap labour Cohen *1980 Education Act; parents given greater powers over governing bodies and administration *1981 Education Act; LEAs are assigned their first duty as to educate disabled children into mainstream school; parents given rights in relation to special needs *1983 CATE; set standards for initial teacher training courses *1986 GCSEs take the place of GCEs, O Levels and CSEs *1988 Education Reform Act Marketisation of Education -Parents given choice over the school their child goes to -National Curriculum introduced; introduced League tables based on SATs ` tests; TGAT (Task Group on Assessment and Testing) set out structure of tests and school league tables -LMS (Local Management of Schools) implemented; responsibility of LEAs reduced; headmasters control over how schools and their budgets are run increased; all 16 and 17 year-olds had to be in some form of education, employment or training; more frequent and rigorous inspections -Aimed to increase academic standards through encouraging inter-school competition

-Outcomes; schools became pickier about which students they accepted because of league tables; the schools highest up the league tables attracted the most attention, which led to house prices surrounding them rising and as such only the middle-classes able to realistically attend them; less funding was available for school who most needed it (sink schools); boys and girl were able to study the same subjects for the first time ever; SATs initially determined the bands/ sets that children were streamed into -1992 OFSTED (Office for Standards in Education) established to oversee inspections, provide teacher training courses and skills providers in England -1993 Education Act; laid down nationwide rules for pupil exclusion; changed the funding regulations of GM schools; redefined what constitutes as special needs -1994 Education Act; Established the TTA (Teacher Training Authority) and regulated student unions -1995 Modern Apprenticeships introduced -1996 Jobseekers Act; laid down the regulations regarding the relationship between education and allowances -1997-2010 New Labours Educational Policies -Modernisation of schools; focus on schools specialising in academic areas, e.g. arts schools, tech schools -EAZs (Education Action Zones); areas of underachievement targeted with extra funding in order to improve academic standards -Educational training for 18-24 year-olds unemployed for 6 months+ -A levels are replaced by AS and A2 levels -Curriculum 2000; testing and teaching of Key Skills introduced -Punishments and training for failing teachers implemented; underachieving schools named and shamed in order to encourage them to push their students to achieve better through embarrassment, loss of reputation and potential replacing of staff -ICT becomes a core subject; computeering skills viewed as necessary for the future -P&P (Performance Related Pay) introduced; increased funding given to overachieving schools, used as an incentive to encourage underachieving schools to raise standards -Persistently underachieving schools closed down; super heads (e.g. William Atkinson, Phoenix School) drafted in to try and drastically raise standards -Aimed to improve achievement in disadvantaged areas, raise overall standards, increase the amount of school places for pupils, increase the amount of workplace skills provided in schools, provide post-16 year-old students with a broader range of subject choices and help young people gain employment

-Evaluation; Chosen specialist schools led to many families relocating or travelling long distances to send their children to a specific school; many EAZs were still underachieving, yet there were noticeable improvements; the AS and A2 levels were initially scorned, but are now accepted as normal; the unemployed training scheme most probably succeeded -Recent Educational Policies -Teach First; a scheme focused on drafting fresh university graduates into failing schools in order to try and improve standards -English Baccalaureate introduced (English, Maths, Science, Humanities and Modern Language) -Underachieving status raised from 30% A*-C GCSEs to 35% -Headmasters promised more power to punish students outside school -Parents, teachers and charities given the choice to set up new schools -Minimum university fees raised 300% to 3000 per year- 9000; in practice, the vast majority of universities have put most of their courses at 9000 per year -Micheal Gove wants to have 1000+ academies in the UK

Differential Educational Achievement

Gender

Stats: -Post-1990, girls consistently outperforming boys in GCSEs; since 1996, girls
have always been c.7-14% better than boys in terms of 5 A* - C GCSE grades -The results for both sexes have improved more or less equally over the past two decades, with boys slightly more so -The gap is gradually narrowing; 2010 GCSE results; Girls = 72% A* - C GCSEs, Boys = 65% (7% difference) -Boys in all-boys schools do worse than boys in mixed schools; girls in all-girls schools do better than girls in mixed schools -Subjects taken mostly by girls; Home Economics (90% girls), Performing Arts (85%), Sociology (70%) -Subjects taken mostly by boys; Technology (92% boys), Economics (70%), P.E (65%) -Post-1997; more women in employment than men nationwide

Explanations
*Home Factors (External) 1. Girls mature quicker; Girls biologically reach puberty on average between 11 and 13, whereas boys usually do between 12 and 14; possibly girls minds mature earlier, meaning that they appreciate the importance of education from a younger age, as such adapting themselves to a work ethic ideology from a younger age (studies do show that girls are usually better organised than boys at schools) 2. Sporting distractions; Statistically, boys engage in sporting activities more than girls do, and are more intensely supportive of professional sporting clubs; could be that a higher proportion of boys are dismissing their academic achievement through desires to fulfil sporting ambitions than girls (counter exercise releases endorphins in the body, enhances mind awareness; a philosophy promoted by the Chinese, the most achieving ethnic group worldwide) 3. Feminisation of Economy; Rise of feminism post-1960s; women gradually desiring careers and independence over motherhood primarily; these attitudes are passed on from mothers to daughters, leading to girls having greater parental motivation than boys; additional mass competition in the job market may have had a derogatory effect on fathers, such negativity passed onto their sons, possibly leading to more boys than girls trying to fulfil ambitions in non-academic areas of interest (e.g. sports, music) 4. Absence of fathers; In most single-parent households, it is the mother who is parent; research shows that boys tend to be more negatively affected academic-wise by the loss of a male role model

*School Factors (Internal) 1. Feminisation of Schooling; An influx of female-friendly subjects (e.g. Drama, Performing Arts, Cookery), an increase in coursework (which

girls are shown to be consistently outperforming boys on) and additional focus towards integrating girls into stereotypically male subjects (GIST) since the 1988 Education Act; is the education system focusing on girls achievement and greater gender equality at the expense of the male students? Before the 1980s, boys were outperforming girls; girls only began outperforming boys as the feminisation of the education system began 2. Masculine Assertiveness; Boys are distracted from their academic studies by natural desires which girls do not experience to the same degree to assert their manliness amongst peers, e.g. disrupting class in order to appear assertive and cool; boys conform to laddish behaviour in order to avoid appearing anti-social and part of an alternative subculture, such which may lead to them being bullied (Skelton Maintaining a masculine identity involves constant confrontation with other boys); boys could also be distracted from their work by other boys exhibiting assertive behaviour in class and the potential pressure of having to assert theirs in event of a confrontation 3. Teacher Stereotypes; Teachers (especially female) assume that girls will be better behaved, work harder, etc, and that boys will be disruptive and assertive; they are influenced by these assumptions, and as such cast a Halo Effect upon the girls and act negatively towards the boys; such leads girls to have greater motivation towards achieving and boys to lose faith in the education system, leading to a self-fulfilling prophecy on the teachers behalf Reasons why girls could still be underachieving in terms of their potential -Girls are distracted from their work by the laddish behaviour of surrounding boys (counter boys act less disruptive and are more docile the more girls there in the classroom) -Girls feel intimidated in the playground by the boys tendency to occupy the majority of the space with sporting activities; psychology reflects negatively upon their work -Boys take up more space in class; doesnt enable girls to work to their full potential efficiency? -Boys are the disruptive factor; girls excel best when at all-girls schools

Ethnicity

Stats: -Chinese consistently outperform all others at GCSE level, regardless of whether they are on FSMs or not (Chinese results are unaffected by degree of wealth) -Indians are the second most achieving UK ethnic group -White British/Irish are just above average -Pakistani/ Bangladeshi are just below average -Afro-Caribbean, African and Other Blacks are all near the bottom of the list -Gypsies, Romas and Travellers are all bottom of the list -Pakistani/Bangladeshi results doubled in the last c.15 years -Somalian results have trebled from 14% 5 A* - C GCSEs in 2002 to 46% in 2011 -Immigration influxes; 1950s = Afro-Caribbeans (Britain needed workers) 1970s = Indians, middle-class families who lived in African countries (seeking asylum from persecution, e.g. Idi Amin in Uganda) Mid-1970s = Pakistanis + Bangladeshis (financial) 1980s = West Africans (financial) 2000s = Eastern Europeans (EU, financial) -In recent years, Black pupils results have improved faster than the average improvement rate

Explanations
Home Factors (External) 1. Genetic Intelligence; Some ethnicities are biologically smarter than others; you can inherit physical characteristics from your parents, so why not mental abilities also? Coincidently, what percentage of your intelligence is adopted; 90%? 5%? Murray = Afro-Caribbeans are born with stupid genes (counter argument; it depends on the individual, not the ethnicity) 2. Language; English not being a students first language is damaging their results; Indians are high up the achievement list, and many are middleclass who spoke English as a first/second language in their previous country; Pakistanis, coincidently, got bad results during the 70s when their main influx was, but the succeeding generations who have been brought up to speak English have significantly improved their average results 3. Families; Primary socialisation differs across ethnicities; 50%+ AfroCaribbean households are lone parent households, with the mother as the parent with custody the vast majority of the time and the children without a male role model - Afro-Caribbeans are low down the list; Chinese families in China have to abide by the ;one-child policy, and the Chinese get the best results worldwide could be that parents are able to focus more individual attention with less children?; Pakistani and Bangladeshi immigrants came over in the 1970s for financial reasons and have improved significantly since could be the motivation of wanting to break out of the poverty trap for poorer ethnic groups (counter argument: white working-class boys are not improving) 4. Material Deprivation; The average richness of an ethnicity appears to correlate with its level of academic achievement, e.g. Indian, Chinese,

British = mainly middle-class, and are in the top half of the table; Blacks, Pakistanis and Gypsies = mainly working-class, and are in the bottom half of the table (counter argument: Chinese students results do not change regarding whether they are on FSMs or not) School Factors (Internal) 1. Ethnocentric Curriculum; The curriculum is centred on British culture, which other ethnicities cannot relate to as well as British students and as such achieve worse in; British get better results than Afro-Caribbeans, Pakistanis and Bangladeshis (counter argument: doesnt explain the superiority of Chinese and Indian students; foreign cultures are a major focus of many subjects, e.g. English and History) 2. Institutional Racism; Schools are prejudice and bias towards certain ethnicities; Gillborn Teachers misinterpret the dress and manner of black students as threatening, leading to black students being more likely to get detention than white students/ Teachers are influenced by stereotypes of black students, and are more likely to suggest vocational courses for them rather than for other ethnicities, leading to black students losing faith in the education system and fialing henceforth because of the teachers self-fulfilling prophecies; Chinese students may also be assumed to excel as teachers cast a Halo Effect upon them; bullying within schools because of ethnic distinction may also distract certain students from their academic studies through psychological consequences (e.g. nerves, distraction, anticipation)

Socio-Economic Class
Stats: -Privately educated pupils are 22 times more likely to go to university than publically educated pupils

-The 100 schools with the most students on FSMs have twice as many students with special educational needs and do half as well at GCSEs than the national average (27% 5 A* - C GCSEs, as opposed to 54%) -The difference between GCSE results for White working-class students and White upper/.middle class students is the widest gap of achievement within an ethnic group in the UK -Gap of achievement between students on FSMs and those not is widening -Number of students eligible for FSMs in the UKs top 200 public schools has risen by 44% despite the national average of FSMs decreasing by 18%

Explanations
Home Factors (External) 1. Material Deprivation; Money is the reason that the working-classes are underachieving and the middle/upper-classes are achieving; workingclass students may be unable to afford educational commodities (e.g. laptops, books) or educational field trips, they may have to looks after siblings or take up part0time work to help support the family, both distracting them from their studies and allowing them less time to revise (counter argument; 2002 census showed that 17% of teens in households earning less than 15,000 per year were in part time work, whereas 28% of teens in households earning more than 50,000 a year were in parttime work; middle-class students are more likely to be in part-time work than working-class students); upper-class families are able to afford private schooling, allowing their children access to the best teachers and equipment available; due to the league table system, the house prices surrounding the highest achieving public schools have risen, meaning that only the middle-classes can afford to live within reasonable transport distance of the best schools; the working-classes may also be unable to afford the increased university fees, such which may limit their chances in higher education and as such demoralise them earlier on, leading to underachievement at secondary level 2. Bourdieu middle-class parents socialise their children into positive work ethics, values and attitudes towards education, whereas workingclass parents dont; middle-class parents generally view achievement in education as vital as they are more likely to perform educated, nonmanual, intellectual professions themselves more so than working-class parents; middle-class parents are more likely to enrol their children into activities which require discipline and hard work, e.g. learning an instrument or playing for a sports team, from an early age than workingclass parents; middle-class children socialise with positive work ethic attitudes (counter argument: some working-classes may feel compelled to encourage their children to excel academically in order to break out of the poverty trap) 3. Language; Middle-class parents use a similar intellectual coded language to teachers (as they are both likely to have attended higher education and come from a similar socio-economic background), whereas working-class parents are more likely to use local dialect and less intellectual vocabulary, meaning that middle-class students can

relate, and as such understand, what they are being told in class more so than the working-class students, which may demoralise them and lead to them losing faith in the education system School Factors 1. Teachers Stereotyping; Teachers view working-class dress sense (e.g. hoodies) and sociolect (e.g. chav language) as signs of stupidity, and as such label such students negatively, seeking to punish them more often and giving them less support to excel academically, leading the working-class students to lose faith in the education system and underachieve through their teachers self-fulfilling prophecy; coincidently, teachers view middle-class students as better behaved because they can relate to their coded language, as such perceiving them as smarter and casting a Halo Effect upon them, leading to them receiving further motivation towards educational achievement 2. School Organization; A disproportionate amount of working-class students are placed in the bottom bands/sets of subjects (could be due to teacher stereotyping, genetic lack of intelligence, etc); working-class students are more likely to be taught through less-expecting teachers and to a lower academic level, leading to their ambitions and expectations lowering and them losing motivation to achieve Government Acts and plans to combat the social class divide -Teach First scheme; bringing young, fresh university graduates into underachieving schools in the hope that they will be enthusiastic and the students will be able to relate to them through their similar ages, leading to greater teacher-student relationships and, as such, positive self-fulfilling prophecies -Increase in academies; extra funding for UASs (Underachieving schools) -Super Heads to be brought into UASs (e.g. Atkinson, Phoenix School) -Underachieving level to be raised from 30% A* - C GCSEs to 35%; heads and teachers threatened with staff replacements in underachieving areas unless rapid improvements are made -New Labour provided mass extra funding for education in all areas (Tony Blair My three main priorities are education, education, education) -Free laptops for under 14 year-old students on FSMs

Educational Views

Functionalists

*3 Ss; Socialisation, Skills, Sorting -Socialisation Primary socialisation is performed by the family; secondary socialisation is performed mainly by education - Education teaches beneficial life skills such as respect for authority, discipline, friendship relations, time-keeping, etc, all of which lead to the next generation of citizens maintaining social order, ensuring the smooth running of the economy which, in turn, provides them with a high standard of living and maintains a positive consensus throughout society -Skills - Education teaches the basic skills needed in a modern, technical, industrial society, focusing on the key areas of communication, literacy, technology and numeracy -Parsons The school is a bridge between the home and the workplace -Sorting - Sifting the stupid from the smart, the smart from the able into bands and sets so that everyone can be taught according to their meritocratic abilities - Sorting people into subjects based on their ideal future professions based on talents, abilities, intelligence and ambitions (e.g. subject choices for GCSE, careers advice); leads to an efficient and content workforce with everyone performing the occupation they are most suited to and feeling gratified because of it -Emile Durkheim Education is positive; it gives us a valued consensus in society, teaching us what is righteous and not, as well as enforcing beneficial social solidarity (the concept of societys togetherness, e.g. parents brought together on sports days) -School acts as an agent of social control by teaching morals, punctuality and obedience -Functionalists believe that the education system is meritocratic, that all students have equal opportunities and that their degree of success is based upon their abilities

Marxists
* 3 PS; Prepare, Pacify, Propaganda
-Prepare -Education prepares working-class students for a life of manual labour and social subordination through forcing them into respecting authority of teachers, such an unequal balance of power in the

classroom which mirror the inequality of wider society and the workplace (Bowles and Gintis Correspondence Theory) -Equally, it prepares the upper-class students for a life of success and social superiority, as societys preconception that private education is better than public education makes them believe that they must be superior to the working-classes; privately educated students are also 22 times more likely to go to university than publically educated students, meaning that they have a better chance of obtaining higher qualification and, with them, a more high-brow occupation -Pacify -Education gives the working-classes a scapegoat to blame for their poor lifestyle and living standards later on in life; they blame their educational underachievement for their subordination in life, a concept which the capitalist media and state supports and ensures remains dominant; this silences the working-classes from rebelling against their oppressive social superiors as they wrongly assume that the responsibility for their subordination is their own; makes them docile and, as such, easily manipulative -Education transmits subjective ideologies, attitudes and values of social hierarchy through the Hidden Curriculum, the subliminal teaching of obedience and unquestionable discipline towards authority (through regulations such as dont argue with the teacher and always wear appropriate school uniform); this benefits socially superior employers as it provides a workforce accustomed to subordinance

-Propaganda

-Althusser Education socialises working-class children into accepting their subordinate status to the middle-class -Bowles and Gintis There is a link between the Hidden Curriculum and the needs of the workforce, a link between low grades and creativity and high grades and punctuality; the education system is aimed at creating an unimaginative, and as such manipulative, workforce - Students are given very little control over what subjects they study (i.e. English, Maths, Science, etc made compulsory); prepares them for the listen and obey nature of the workplace -Capitalist work is dreary, and external positive sanctions are needed to motivate the workers; for them it is a wage packet, and correspondingly for students it is qualifications -Marxists believe that education is beneficial to capitalism, as it legalises inequality, making society appear fair and just whilst obscuring the class inequalities within it; safeguarding an elite-ruled, capitalist society

Interactionists
-Hargreaves One of the most important aspects of education concerns the ways in which teachers make sense and respond to the behaviour of their pupils - (Deviance in Classrooms research) teachers initially characterise students based on 6 assumed traits; 1) Ability and Enthusiasm for work, 2) How

likeable they were, 3) Personality, 4) Their relationships with other students, 5) Their level of deviance and 6) To what degree they conform to discipline -Pupils preparation for the world is affected by their teachers expectations, both positive and negative, as the degree of positivity in their approach to individual student (i.e. how often they offer them advice, how often they initially label them as disrupters, how often they punish them, how often they are lenient with them, etc) can affect the degree of motivation that individual has towards achieving in their education and the degree of faith that they have in the education system; the teachers self-fulfilling prophecy being a defining factor in how they achieve academically -e.g. Rosenthal & Jacobson; 1968, California, they told teachers that some students picked completely at random were the most likely in the class to make rapid progress academically; one year on, and the students that had made the most significant progress were he ones they had picked -Teachers views of the ideal pupil are largely based upon middle-class principles (e.g. motivated, intelligent, well-behaved), as they themselves are likely to have been socialised into a middle-class background as they are likely to have had to go to university in order to become a teacher; such results in teachers mainly adorning middle-class students with the Halo Effect (positive self-fulfilling prophecy) and negatively labelling working-class students (negative self-fulfilling prophecy) -Students act accordingly to their educational socially constructed identities (e.g. bully, teachers pet, chav, bad boy) classified by teachers and/or peers, as well as to external socially constructed identities (e.g. Gypsies = violent, Chinese = studious) -Ball distinguished between 4 types of student subcultures; 1) Supportive Pro-school because they believed in the principle of it 2) Manipulators Pro-school because it suited their interests 3) Passive Those who drift into non-conformist behaviour 4) Rejecting Those who actively rejected the school and its values -Hargreaves The order of the classroom is negotiated based on a consensus worked out between teachers and pupils; teachers have the initial advantage with their formal authority and sanctions; they use positive sanctions (e.g. end lesson early), negative sanctions (e.g. detention) and warnings (e.g. tales about things they did wrong and regret as a student) to establish a consensus which suits them

Criticisms of Functionalist, Marxist and Interactionist Theories

Functionalism -The system is clearly not meritocratic; class (privately educated students are 22 times more likely to attend university than publically educated students), ethnicity

(more than twice as many Chinese students achieve the required GCSEs than Black students every year in the UK) and gender (7-14% more girls have achieved the required GCSEs every year for the last 2 decades than boys) all have an obvious influence upon a students educational achievement, not just their personal abilities -The main beliefs of the most powerful are still transmitted be them intentionally or unintentionally through some areas of education (e.g. university fees rising by 300%, making it more difficult for the working-classes to attend higher education, and the continuance of unintentionally middle-class bias 11+ exams in some areas) Marxism -Reynolds; Bowles and Gintis Correspondence Theory fails to appreciate the survival of liberal humanities subjects and the limited emphasis on sciences; the curriculum does not seem designed to teach skills needed by employers of unquestionability and passitivy (e.g. Sociology, a logical, philosophical subject is one of the most widely taken for A levels) -Brown; Modern day businesses require teamwork and creativity skills to succeed in the increasingly intellectual British industry; employers actually criticise the educational system for providing contradictory individualistic skills through promoting competition amongst the students through based examinations Interactionism -Labelling theory does not appreciate how students do have the capacity to rebel against their labels, sometimes even use negative labels as motivation to work harder and excel academically -(Marxists) Interactionists fail to appreciate that negative self-fulfilling prophecies are universal for working-class students, as are positive self-fulfilling prophecies for middle and upper-class students, as the educational system is effectively a propaganda machine of the capitalist elite; such influence is on a macro-sociological, socio-economic basis, not a micro-sociological, individual basis

Pupil Subcultures
-A cultural subgroup differentiated by status, ethnic background, residence, religion or other factors that functionally unify the group and act collectively on each member

*Reactive

-Develop through a reaction to actions the teachers or schools are taking, generally developing out of some form of mutual dissatisfaction with treatment within the school (e.g. Skivers) -Developed without any adult input or influence, and are labelled either positively or negatively by those in authority (e.g. Chavs, Goths) -Developed through a desire to be alternative to the mainstream, (Woods) from Ingratiators who try to earn the favour of the teachers at one extreme to Rebels who explicitly reject the culture of the school at the other (e.g. Teachers Pets, Bad Boys) -Developed through an objection to the principles and practices of the education system (e.g. Slackers) -Includes those who intrinsically value education, seeing it as enjoyable and worth whole, those who extrinsically value education, seeing qualifications as a means to a desired end despite maybe not enjoying their education and those who view school as an enjoyable place for socialising without necessarily prioritising qualifications -Those whom view their time at school as wasted and uncomfortable, and anticipate until they can escape into the adult world of work and family

*Independent

*Counter-School

*Anti-School *Pro-School Girls

*Anti-School Girls

-Shields; Identity, rather than subculture, has become the new focus for explaining student behaviour -Maffesoli; Neo-tribes are loosely bound, temporary group consisting of a range of different identities and relationships centering around a common lifestyle (e.g. participants in a school play, disbanding once the play has been performed for the last time)