Case Still Not Proven: a reply to Cecile Wright

Abstract

This paper is a reply to the response by Cecile Wright to my critique of her study of two comprehensive schools which formed part of the broader study entitled Education for Some.

Researching Race/Ethnicity and Educational Inequality in English Secondary Schools: A Critical Review of the Research Literature Between 1980 and 2005

“…Although the author acknowledged that ethnic minority pupils were more likely to deviate from teachers’ definition of the ideal pupil, he argued that there was little evidence to support the claim that teachers discriminated or stereotyped ethnic minority pupils. The conflicting findings from this study and the studies cited above generated considerable debate focused on the validity and generalizability of their respective findings and, related to this, the nature of the evidence provided (Connolly, 1992; Foster, 1990a, 1991, 1992a, 1992b, 1992c, 1993a, 1993b; Foster et al, 1996; Gillborn, 1995; Gomm, 1993, 1995; Hammersley, 1992, 1993b, 2001a; Troyna, 1993, 1995; Wright, 1990).…”

“…However, in a reply, Wright (1990) argued that Foster misrepresented her case and that her study focused on the importance of school processes, teacher attitudes, and pupil performance but not on teacher racism. Furthermore, she criticized Foster for not substantiating his alternative interpretations of the data and for not giving “solid reasons why [statements of teachers and pupils] should not be accepted.” In a further reply, Foster (1991) claimed that Wright’s study focused on discriminatory behavior and negative attitudes of teachers toward minority pupils and hence on teacher racism and argued that Wright failed to address the validity concerns pointed out by Foster.…”

Underachiever or Misunderstood? A Reply to Roger Gomm

“…Their purpose is to explicate the allegedly dubious empirical grounds on which claims of racial inequality in education have been mounted. Readers of this journal will be familiar with the exchanges between Foster and both Cecile Wright and Paul Connolly (Foster, 1990a(Foster, , 1991Wright, 1990;Connolly 1992). These have centred on Foster's critique of Wright's research into the differential treatment of white and Afro-Caribbean children in two comprehensive schools and on the controversy surrounding Foster's ethnography of an inner urban, multi-ethnic comprehensive school.…”

Pupils' perspectives on racism and differential treatment by teachers: On stragglers, the ill and being deviant

“…Some commentators have raised major questions about these findings. They point both to conceptual problems regarding the definition of racism and also to problems surrounding the interpretation of the data (Foster, 1990b, 1991, 1992; Foster et al , 1996). This generated a long‐running debate to which there was no decisive end in terms of agreement (Connolly & Troyna, 1998; Stevens, 2007).…”