Labelling

It's tough, but try not to do it.

Labelling theory, put crudely, says that problems are only problems because someone — usually of course those in power, like teachers — define or label them as such (which does not of course deny that this may be a perfectly reasonable thing to do). So using a mobile phone in class is not inherently "bad", until someone labels it as such. And of course "answering back" to a teacher is only an offence—and a very subjective one—because teachers have the power to make it so.

The label of "deviant" (or perhaps something more benign) is then attached to people, so they may accept and internalise it, believing it of themselves. It is in this "secondary" sense which is most commonly used in educational contexts.

Becker and Lemert developed the theory, Hargreaves et al showed how it could apply in school classrooms, and Rosenthal and Jacobson suggested (in what is now regarded as a provocative but flawed study) that it could create a self-fulfilling prophecy in school such that children defined as "bright" would live up to expectations.

Self-fulfilling Prophecy

The stock-market is probably the primary field of self-fulfilling prophecy, in which if it is predicted that a stock will fall, there is a crisis of confidence and shareholders sell it, so that it does indeed fall in value (and don't we know it!) It can work the other way, too, as in the dot.com bubble.

In education, despite the Rosenthal and Jacobson study, labelling-based self-fulfilling prophecies usually operate to the detriment of students. Whole categories of students, based on gender, ethnicity or background, may be written off as incapable of achieving, setting up a frame of reference in which their failings are noticed and their achievements discounted. Individual students may also be labelled by being told they will never amount to anything, or that they are "no good at maths". Internalised, these labels are carried into new situations, including further and higher education, and the student is set up to fail.

There are obvious limits to the extent to which "upward" labelling can work, but few limits in the downward direction, and it is easy to fall into the trap. Unfortunately, if a student has been labelled in the past, she or he is likely to find that messages which reinforce that judgement come over much more clearly than any which contradict it. Casual remarks may be just as potent as formal assessments — or even more so, given that students are well aware of the formal constraints placed on recorded judgements.

Safeguards

References

BECKER H (1963) Outsiders; studies in the sociology of deviance Glencoe, Ill: Free Press
HARGREAVES D, HESTAR S and MELLOR F (1975) Deviance in Classrooms London; Routledge and Kegan Paul
LEMERT E (1972) Human Deviance, Social Problems and Social Control (2nd edn.) Englewood Cliffs N J; Prentice-Hall
ROSENTHAL R and JACOBSON L (1968) Pygmalion in the Classroom New York; Holt, Rinehart and Winston

OK: the references are ancient, but there are such things as "golden oldies".

To reference this page copy and paste the text below:

ATHERTON J S (2009) Learning and Teaching; [On-line] UK: Available: Accessed:

(Note that if you are using Internet Explorer, and it is doing its "nanny" thing, the full reference will not display. There will be a bar across the top of the screen advising you of "blocked content". Click on it and select "Allow blocked content" and confirm in the pop-up box. I know it's a pain, but we're stuck with it.)

Original material by James Atherton: last up-dated 4 November 2009

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 Unported License.

Click here to send to a friend

Back to top