Ethnic minority pupils and educational achievement in secondary schools in Islington, North London.

Rufin Batota Mpeho London Metropolitan University Postgraduate Certificate of Education Module: SDQ018 Research Project Academic year: 2019-2020

Title: Does being an ethnic minority pupil affect the educational achievement in a secondary school in North London?

1. Abstract This research paper aims at assessing if belonging to an ethnic minority group would affect BAME educational achievement in school in North London. External and internal factors are reviewed to explore the different causes of their underachievement. The focus has been on the external factor of material deprivation and official data have shown a big socioeconomic gap between the poor and the rich in the borough of Islington.

The data show the alarming child deprivation in the borough, the highest in London and the 4th in England. I have shown that there is a difference in achievement within and between ethnic minority groups due to cultural views on education of their parents. As far as gender is concerned, girls achieve higher than boys. However, cultural views on gender seem to be an obstacle for girls in Asian families to reach further or higher education.

Social class, gender, culture, linguistic abilities and socio-economic factors seem to make a difference in achievement between and within BAME groups.

2. Introduction

The choice my this research topic has been motivated by my passion for ethnic minority achievement (EMA) that started more than ten years while working as an EMA teaching assistant in a school in North London (Islington Borough). What I found striking was the gap between poor and wealthy families in a Borough that is considered as one of the wealthiest in London.

Ethnic group refers to ‘people who share common history, customs and identity, as well as, in most cases, language and religion, and who see themselves as a distinct unit’ (Lawson and Garrod, 2001). They also define ethnic minorities as ‘groups in a population who are different from a different ethnic group from the indigenous population’. In the UK, the term BAME (Black, Asian and Ethnic minority) is currently used compared to the white majority group. There are noticeable inequalities in educational achievement of different ethnic groups (Thompson, 2019).

In the research ‘Invisible Islington: Living in Poverty in Inner London’ (2017) led by the Cripplegate Foundation charity, striking social extremes are depicted, a borough where the ‘London’s richest and poorest residents exist side by side, living entirely different lives’. The picture painted in the report in that of a ‘divided borough in a divided city, where those living in poverty inhabit an invisible bubble’ from within they see the socio-economic privileges that their neighbours enjoy ‘conspicuously’. The most affected families by poverty in Islington are those from ethnic minorities.

In this research paper, I am going to enquire on the factors that affect ethnic minority pupils’ educational achievement in a secondary school in Islington. I will be reviewing the literature on external and internal factors that affect educational attainment of ethnic minorities.

External factors (outside school) include cultural deprivation (Moynihan, 1965; Murray, 1984; Pryce, 1979), material deprivation (Flaherty, 2004; Gillborn, 1990 and Mirza, 1992). and racism in wider society (Mason, 1995; Rex, 1986; Noon, 1993).

Amongst internal factors are: home-school relation (Tomlinson, 2017; Douglas, 1964; Craft 1970), teachers’ perceptions, labelling and teacher racism (Gillborn and Youdell, 2000; Gillborn, 2001), misconception of pupils identity (Connolly, 2002; Clark and Drudy, 2006) and an ethnocentric curriculum (Tomlinson, 1989; Verma, 1989; Carignan, N., Sanders, M. and Pourdavood, R.G., 2005).

Because of the limited access to data collection in school, I will be examining external (outside school) factors, relying on official existing data as well as a wide range of literature. This will help to draw a parallel between poverty, mobility and discrimination that experience ethnic minority families and child deprivation affecting the educational attainment of ethnic minority pupils in secondary education (Blanden and Gregg, 2004; Feinstein, 2004; Brown and Hood, 2016).

However, it is worth mentioning that not all ethnic minority pupils underachieve.

Social class, parental motivation and value of education may be factors which differentiate the educational achievement within and between ethnic minorities.

Tomlison (1991) argues that sometimes a school attended by a child ‘makes more difference to attainment and performance than ethnicity’.

Finally, this research paper will link with the UN Convention on the Rights for the Child to assess whether those rights are being failed by the local and education authorities (Howe and Covell, 2013; Killkelly and Lundy, 2006), and the urgent need for teacher training institutions to equip trainee teachers with necessary tools to teach in a multicultural society like Britain (Anast and Ambrosio, 2002; Gardner, 2013).

2. Literature review

A great range of literature from education and sociology links educational achievement of ethnic minority pupils to external (outside the education system) and internal (inside the education system) factors.

1. External factors External factors include cultural deprivation, material deprivation and racism in wider society. a. Cultural deprivation Theorists dealing with cultural deprivation cite the lack of intellectual and linguistic skills as a cause of underachievement amongst pupils from ethnic minorities. There is a lack of intellectual stimulation and enriching experience at home. Linguistically, there may be a use of restricted code of English at home by BAME families, especially with families whose first language is not English, or where there is use of low Standard English Cultural deprivation causes low achievement amongst minority pupils as a result of lack of motivation. They are unable to compete with pupils from white ethnic group who socialise into the mainstream culture which promote ‘competitiveness’ and ‘deferred gratification’. In the white British culture, competitiveness is one the values that is inculcated in children from the young age. They work towards their ‘future’ to go to university and get a decent job. BAME children on the contrary often display a fatalistic, ‘live today attitude’ that does not value education.

Having dysfunctional family may be a cause of underachievement in minority pupils.

Many Black families are lone-parent or single mother families which results in financial difficulty (Moynihan, 1965). There is sometimes lack of strong male role models that leads to a lack of discipline in school (Moynihan, 1965; Murray, 1984).

According to Sewell (2010), 59% of black Caribbean children live in lone-parent households, compared with 22% of white children.

The consequence of it could be a cycle of dysfunction, whereby boys whose fathers walked away may grow up thinking that it is fine to walk away from ones children or for girls thinking they would be able to raise a family as a ‘strong’ single mother.

Some cultural deprivation theorists cite the Black experience of slavery as being culturally devastating, leading to low self-esteem amongst the Black community as a result of losing of language, religion and family system (Pryce, 1986).

Asian families have more positive attitude towards education. Asian parents have higher aspiration and are more supportive of their children education. The implication is that Asia has a different experience of colonialism, not as ‘devastating’ as in Africa or the Caribbean, as their language, religion and family systems are still intact (Driver and Ballard, 1981). Also, as Asian children are expected a respectful attitude to parents, this helps with the school environment in terms of behaviour and respect for teachers (Lupton, 2004). However, there are a lot of mental health issues caused by parents’ high expectations and the controlling attitude towards girls often leads them to drop school early (Khan, 1979).

However, compared to white working families, BAME children often aspire to attend university more than white working class children, just because they see education as a way up in society and out of poverty. According to Sutton Trust (MORI, 2004), 80% 11-16yr old ethnic minority pupils aspire to go to university compared to 68% white pupils.

Critics of cultural deprivation assert that it fails to recognise the positive effects of ethnicity on achievement. For example, in Black single mother families, the mother is often regarded as a ‘strong, independent role model’. Driver (1977) thinks that the positive effect of female role model is often ignored.

Furthermore, Teacher racism is often underestimated, which may prevent Black student’s achievement rather than low self-esteem and ‘weak culture’ pretended by some teachers. (Lawrence, 1982) Critics opposed to cultural deprivation also argue that one cannot be culturally deprived by being culturally different. These children are not deprived of culture; they are brought up in a different culture (Keddie, 1971). Referring to the curriculum, Keddie (1971) sees it as being ethnocentric as it is biased in favour of ‘white culture’.

There is a need for the curriculum to be ‘decolonised’.

This view is opposite to Scruton’s (1986) who asserts that low achievement of ethnic minority pupils is due to their failing ‘to embrace the British culture’. In the same vein Flew (1986) believe that under-achievement is a result of cultural differences, not the education system to blame. Scruton’s Conservativism may seem controversial with the recent uprising for racial equality in the British multicultural society: every culture matters.

b. Material deprivation Material deprivation is considered as a ‘lack of material necessities seen as normal for everyday life’. Substandard accommodation and low income may result in educational failure of the ethnic minority pupils. This implies overcrowded homes for big families. According to Flaherty (2004), 15% of minority groups live in overcrowded homes, compared to 2% for Whites. That is where the notion of social class intervenes because most of the BAME parents belong to the working class and are in low paid employment or unemployed. Africans, Pakistanis and Bangladeshis are three times more likely to be unemployed than Whites and Pakistanis are two times as likely to be in semi-skilled or unskilled jobs compared to Whites (Flaherty, 2004). Consequently, there is not enough money to pay for activities and tools that enrich extra-curricular experiences in order to enhance their social skills.

The Swan Report suggests that social class differences account for 50% of differences in achievement between ethnic groups. It is worth mentioning the material inequality between different ethnic minority groups. Indians, for example, have a higher social class position than Bangladeshi and Pakistanis. This is reflected in educational achievement. However, social class do not always override the influence of ethnicity. For example, middle-class black pupils do comparatively poorly at GCSE compared to middle-class pupils from other ethnic groups (Gillborn and Mirza, 2000).

c. Racism in wider society Poverty itself may be a by-product of racism. ‘Discrimination is a continuing and persistent feature of the experience of Britain’s citizens of minority ethnic origin’ (Mason, 1995). It is part of the daily lives of ethnic minority pupils and may be expressed in a form of bullying. This affects their self-esteem and consequently their educational attainment. Furthermore, racial discrimination leads to social exclusion.

This is shown in housing, employment and education.

Racism also leads to discrimination both inside and outside the classroom. Black British pupils are more likely to be excluded from schools than their White British counterpart. In housing, for example, minorities are often forced into substandard accommodation which results into material deprivation (Rex, 1986). In employment,

often companies are more encouraging to white candidates over other candidates (Noon, 1993). The implication is that pupils from ethnic minorities may think that their education is worthless because their employability may be affected by their belonging to minorities.

2. Internal factors a. Home-school relation with ethnic minority parents Tomlinson (in Craft, 2017) examines the way teachers perceive ethnic minorities’ parents and what those parents do expect from school. She points out the importance of ‘good home-school relation’ based on how parents and teachers cooperate, communicate and mutually understand one another in order to make sure that ethnic minority pupils are given ‘a fair and equal education as their indigenous peers’. Immigrant parents in Britain who were educated in the colonial education system have high expectations of the education system their children are educated in, without sometimes understanding how that education system works. Furthermore, until very recently, there was little provision for teachers to be equipped with ‘real understanding of the home and cultural backgrounds of minority pupils’. Sometimes parents of minority pupils are unwilling to understand the ‘unfamiliar education system’.

Grant and Ray (2010) urge teachers to include a ‘supportive manner’ in their teaching practices in order to support families on academic issues and behavioural challenges, as well as helping families understand the curriculum.

Although there have been difficulty and mistrust between school and ethnic minority parents, things seem to have improved in the last fifteen years in Britain, as more parents are participating and being involved in the education process of their children. For most teachers and parents, home-school relation is a means of improving pupils’ attendance and achievement.

Numerous studies during the 1960s and 1970s proved the ‘differences in achievement between the social classes’ (Douglas, 1964, Craft, 1970). The Plowden Report (DES, 1967) stressed on the positive parental attitudes and their interest towards education that ‘strongly influenced children’s school achievement’. Since the Taylor Report (1977), the ‘parental participation in decision-making processes in education’ increased.

However, despite the improvement in home-school relation, there is a ‘crisis of confidence’ because parents from ethnic minorities still question ‘the ability of schools to educate minority pupils in accordance with principles of equal opportunity’. According to their parents, minority pupils are believed not to be well equipped with ‘the skills and credentials to compete for jobs with white pupils’ and

they are unwilling to accept that ‘home and family factors’ are the primary reason for ‘their children’s poor school progress’ . They have also questioned ‘the willingness of schools’ to fully embrace cultural differences (Tomlinson, 2017).

Another limitation to a good home-school relation and communication is the language barrier’. But Guo (2018) goes over the traditional home-school relation.

She thinks that the relation should go beyond a mere parental ‘involvement’ to become a real parental ‘engagement’ where their languages and cultures are valued to enrich the school experience.

b. Teachers’ perceptions of ethnic minorities Cohen (1989) explores how teachers perceive ethnic minority pupils and the way teachers’ perceptions impact on their achievement. He refers to the Swann Report (DES, 1985) Education for all that provided a response to multicultural education in three forms: ‘permeation’, ‘core studies’ and ‘optional studies’, which all have an equal value and complementarity. It is essential for teacher training institutions to provide multicultural courses ‘to prepare teacher for their role in a multi-racial society’ as stated in the Rampton Report (DES, 1981). Soon after the Rampton Report, the House of Common Affairs (House of Commons, 1981) published a document underlining the recognition of Britain as a multi-cultural society. It is Cohen’s view for multiculturalism to be reflected in initial teacher training.

Giles and Cherrington (1981) led a survey on courses in multicultural education in teacher training programmes. Although it was perceived by many trainee teachers and tutors as ‘an exploration of problems faced by black people in white British society’, it was actually, for the authors, an educational approach for a multicultural society. The survey had for goal ‘to widen the cultural content of the teacher training syllabus to reflect elements representative of all the various cultural groups that comprise the United Kingdom’. In the same perspective, Childs (2017) agrees for curriculum practices and classroom environments to strive in order to make ‘differences to be part of the general curriculum’. This would become a ‘shared culture’, not a separate culture.

c. Labelling and teacher racism Teachers sometimes hold ‘racialised expectations’ towards ethnic minority pupils.

Black students are often stereotyped to have behavioural problems as their behaviour is interpreted as challenging teachers’ authority (Gillborn and Youdell, 2000). Stereotyped Black boys as badly behaved could result in them being placed in lower sets. This could lead to self-fulling prophecy of underachievement (Foster, 1976).

3. Implications of literature for school (findings) Understanding internal and external factors of underachievement amongst different ethnic minority pupils at the beginning of secondary school (Year 7) would help school leaders and teachers to establish fair policies, promoting social inclusion and caring for those with educational needs. Schools should promote social equality and diversity as stated in the UN Convention on the Rights for the Child: ‘State Parties recognise the right of every child to education and with a view to achieving this right progressively and on the basis of equal opportunity. (UNICEF, 1989, p.9).

Diversity and equality are often considered as separate concepts. I agree with Ahmed (2007) that diversity is often used to emphasise ethnic differences, rather than a drive towards social justice and equality. Furthermore, understanding diversity is a necessary tool for education leaders to provide a more ‘inclusive’ rather than ‘ethnocentric’ curriculum.

The UNESCO Salamanca statements of 1994 (UNESCO, 1994) put the emphasis on Special Educational Needs and on the way inclusion could evolve to ensure equal opportunity for all by responding to the diverse needs of students. This was develop further a decade later (UNESCO, 2003) beyond the needs of SEN pupils only. The effective inclusion was seen beyond SEN pupils and highlighted the necessity of meeting the needs of all learners.

Taking into consideration the factors that contribute to the underachievement of different ethnic group pupils, UNESCO’s (2003) new approach was to focus on transforming education systems to respond to the diversity of learners, rather than focusing on the way learners could be integrated in the mainstream education. This led to the recognition of diversity of learners and the emphasis was put on the importance of transforming practice to meet their different needs: pastoral, educational, emotional and behavioural.

The main aim of this paper is to assess if being a pupil from ethnic minorities may affect your achievement in a school in North London. The school I am focusing on is situated in the Borough of Islington where poor and wealthy housing areas are clearly noticeable. It is crucial to understand the socio-economic inequalities in the Borough by looking at the official figures and data.

Considering the Income Deprivation Affecting Children Index (IDACI), Islington was considered to be the most deprived borough in London in 2019, where 28% residents under the age of 18 living households face income deprivation. Islington has the 10th highest levels of IDACI in the country. There is a variation of deprivation

within Islington with 18% and 32% in Highbury East (a wealthy pocket) and Caledonian ward (a relatively poor area) respectively.

IDACI is reflected in the employment benefit figures by ethnicity. In December 2018, there were 30% of Black/African/Caribbean/Black British residents who claimed Job Seeker Allowance, although of the whole Islington population, they accounted for only 12% of the whole Islington population, making them overrepresented JSA claimants. There has been 7% increase of people in work earning less than the London Living Wage per hour in 2018. Again the most affected families are the ethnic minority and White working class ones because most parents are unemployed, in under skilled jobs or in low paid employment (below the London Living Wage).

To sum up it all, in the End Child Poverty (2019), it is reported the levels of child poverty in Islington after housing costs has been at 47.5%, the 4th highest out of all local authorities in the UK. Material deprivation clearly affects disadvantaged pupils at the end of KS4. In 2017/18, the proportion of disadvantaged pupils in Islington was 63%, the largest out of all the London local authorities. According the 2019 census, 32% of residents were in Black and Minority Ethnic (BAME) groups. It was reported that children growing up in BAME households in Islington were ‘more likely to be living in poverty’ compared to white children. To some extent Local authorities are failing children’s rights are stated by the UNCRC in its articles 26 and 27: the right to social security and adequate living standars. 

Conclusion of my findings

It is important to mention the difference in educational achievement within and between ethnic minority pupils. The average attainment 8 scored by GCSE students from ethnic minorities in Islington in 2017/18 showed that students from Black ethnic groups achieved 43.7%, compared to the highest 52.5% from Asian ethnic groups.

The 9 points gap is in line with the London-wide gap, but higher than the England gap of 5 points. It is also worth mentioning that in all minority groups girls achieve higher than boys (Ofsted Report, 1999). All in all, assessing ethnic minority pupils will take into account their ethnic minority groups, parents’ social class, gender and cultural perceptions of the parents on education.



School’s provision on Ethnic Minorities Achievement (EMA)

The school recognises the need to help underachieving students from ethnic minorities by adding an Ethnic Minority Achievement Department in the curriculum.

Amongst its goals, the department aims at: - Reducing underachievement levels of ethnic minority pupils.

- Encouraging the involvement of ethnic minority parents and carers in the education and personal development of their child.

-

-

-

Improving home-school communication translation and interpretation services.

Providing in-class support and additional intensive English language classes for targeted ethnic minority students, beginner learners, including newly arrived students who need additional curriculum support.

Ensuring students’ prior learning and experience is acknowledged and accredited, for example by gaining GCSE and AS level in their home language.

Increasing whole school knowledge, understanding and appreciation of different cultures.

Raising the evidence and profile of bilingualism visibly and audibly within the school.

Extending provision for students to share in heritage activities such as music, dance and art as well as experiencing the arts in the wider world.

Providing opportunities for children’s learning and homework completion to be supported outside of school hours.

The school’s policy is in view with the UN Convention for the Rights of the Child: 





Every child without discrimination, whatever their ethnicity, sex, religion, language, abilities or any other status, whatever they think or say, whatever their family background (article 1).

Respect of the rights and responsibilities of parents and carers to provide guidance and direction to their child as they grow up, so that they fully enjoy their rights. This must be done in a way that recognises the child’s increasing capacity to make their own choices.

Every child has the right to an education.

4. The importance of this research in teaching It is important to recognise the role of teaching as a ‘facilitator’ to help students achieve their maximum and involve parents in their education and personal development. Understanding socio-economic factors that affect ethnic minority pupils help teachers to avoid false perceptions and racism towards those pupils.

The crucial point is for teachers to be equipped to teach in a multicultural environment and initial teacher trainer must provide extensive study cases to help trainee teacher understand and embrace multiculturalism. Understanding ethnic minorities and the factors of their underachievement improve teachers’ professional development by reflecting on ones performances, linking them to Teachers’ Standards.

From experience as trainee teacher, the training has not provided us with enough tools to be teaching in a multicultural school. This has been reflected in the experiences of many of my colleagues in their school placements. There have been reports of struggling in ethnic minorities-majority schools. Perceptions and stereotypes due to unconscious bias towards ethnic minorities was the only tools of many trainee teachers.

Reflecting on my teaching, I am lucky to be equipped with previous experience that many of my trainee colleagues did not have, having worked with ethnic minorities in schools for almost 10 years. Despite the fact of having previous experience, this research has revealed to me how deeper the issue of ethnic minority achievement is, linking it to external socio-economic factors such as child poverty. 

Summary

Apart from their subject knowledge and pedagogical principals, beginning teachers must be equipped with the necessary tools to teach in a multicultural society as Britain. The multicultural aspect teaching is not being considerably promoted in initial teacher training. Furthermore, schools’ policies should promote social equality and diversity as stated in the UN Convention on the Rights for the Child: ‘State Parties recognise the right of every child to education and with a view to achieving this right progressively and on the basis of equal opportunity. (UNICEF, 1989).

6- Research proposal This research paper is based on existing quantitative and qualitative data. Originally, this research would have included data collection techniques such as interviews with students, school staff, parents (if possible), questionnaires, observation and school’s data. I would have scheduled interviews on pupils’ perceptions by respecting their anonymity and with their parents’ permission. This would adhere to ethical principles to protect the dignity, welfare and rights of the participants.

Questionnaires would have made of the questions such as:         

What sort of help do you get from your teachers to help with your achievement?

How well do your teachers know your educational needs?

Have you ever been victim of teacher’s racism?

What do you do if you get stuck and need help?

Are your parents or carers employed?

Is your work marked regularly and feed backed to you?

Do teachers report on your work on your own/ in groups/ as a class?

How often do you have tests to see how well you are doing?

Do you have siblings? How many? Does it impact on your space at home?



Have you ever been excluded due to behaviour issues?

Many more questions could be added to assess if their socio-economic situation has an impact on their achievement.

The data collection would be focusing on age, gender, predicted grades and actual grades, ethnicity and age group. The data collection would focus on KS3, especially the Year 7 group who are experiencing a transition between primary and secondary school.

Bibliography Anast Seguin, C. and Ambrosio, A.L., 2002. Multicultural vignettes for teacher preparation. Multicultural Perspectives, 4(4), pp.10-16.

Ahmed, S., 2007. ‘You end up doing the document rather than doing the doing’: Diversity, race equality and the politics of documentation. Ethnic and racial studies, 30(4), pp.590-609.

Ahmed, S., 2007. The language of diversity. Ethnic and racial studies, 30(2), pp.235256.

Blanden, J. and Gregg, P., 2004. Family income and educational attainment: a review of approaches and evidence for Britain. Oxford review of economic policy, 20(2), pp.245-263.

Browne, J. and Hood, A., 2016. Living standards, poverty and inequality in the UK: 2015-2016 to 2020-2021 (No. R114). IFS Report.

Carignan, N., Sanders, M. and Pourdavood, R.G., 2005. Racism and ethnocentrism: Social representations of preservice teachers in the context of multi-and intercultural education. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 4(3), pp.1-19.

Cherrington, D. and Giles, R., 1981. Present provision in initial training. Teaching in a Multi-cultural Society, pp.75-85.

Childs, K., 2017. Integrating multiculturalism in education for the 2020 classroom.

Journal for Multicultural Education.

Cohen, L., 1989. Ignorance, not Hostility: Student Teachers' Perceptions of Ethnic Minorities in Britain. Education for All: a landmark in pluralism, p.151.

Clarke, M. and Drudy, S., 2006. Teaching for diversity, social justice and global awareness. European Journal of Teacher Education, 29(3), pp.371-386.

Connolly, P., 2002. Racism, gender identities and young children: Social relations in a multi-ethnic, inner city primary school. Routledge.

Craft, M. ed., 2017. Education and cultural pluralism (Vol. 16). Routledge.

Foster, G.G., Schmidt, C.R. and Sabatino, D., 1976. Teacher expectancies and the label “learning disabilities”. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 9(2), pp.111-114.

Gardner, P., 2013. Teaching and learning in multicultural classrooms. Routledge.

Gillborn, D. and Mirza, H.S., 2000. Educational Inequality: Mapping Race, Class and Gender. A Synthesis of Research Evidence.

Giles, R. and Cherrington, D., 1981. Multicultural Education in the UK: a survey of courses and other provisions in British Institutions of Higher Education.

Gillborn, D., 2001. ‘Raising standards’ or rationing education? Racism and social justice in policy and practice. Support for Learning, 16(3), pp.105-111.

Grant, K.B. and Ray, J.A., 2010. Home, school, and community collaboration: Culturally responsive family involvement. Sage.

Guo, Y. ed., 2018. Home-School Relations: International Perspectives. Springer.

Howe, R.B. and Covell, K., 2013. Education in the Best Interests of the Child: A Children's Rights Perspective on Closing the Achievement Gap. University of Toronto Press.

Ipsos, M.O.R.I., 2004. School Omnibus 2003-2004 Wave 10: A research study amongst 11-16-year olds on behalf of the Sutton Trust.

Killkelly, U. and Lundy, L., 2006. Children's rights in action: using the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child as an auditing tool. Child & Fam. lq, 18, p.331.

Lawson, T. and Garrod, J., 2001. Dictionary of sociology. Taylor & Francis.

Lupton, R., 2004. Schools in disadvantaged areas: recognising context and raising quality. LSE STICERD Research Paper No. CASE076.

Mason, P.L., 1995. Race, competition and differential wages. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 19(4), pp.545-567.

Moynihan, D.P., 1965. The Negro family: The case for national action Washington.

DC: Office of Planning and Research, US Department of Labor.

Noon, M., 1993. Racial discrimination in speculative application: Evidence from the UK's top 100 firms. Human Resource Management Journal, 3(4), pp.35-47.

Plowden, B., 1967. Children and their primary schools (The Plowden Report).

Pryce, K., 1986. Endless pressure: a study of West Indian life-styles in Bristol. Bristol Classical Press.

Rex, J., 1986. Race and ethnicity. Open University Sewell, S.C., 2010. Decolonization and the Other: The Case of the British West Indies. Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

Swann Report, 1985, DES Taylor Report, 1977.

Thompson, R., 2019. Education, Inequality and social class: Expansion and stratification in Educational Opportunity. Routledge

Tomlinson, S., 1989. The Origins of the Ethnocentric. Education for All: a landmark in pluralism, p.26.

Tomlinson, S., 1991. Ethnicity and educational attainment in England: An overview.

Anthropology & education quarterly, 22(2), pp.121-139.

UNESCO’s Salamanca Statements, 1994 www.cripplegate.org/our-work/research/invisible-islington-living-poverty-inner-london (accessed on 16/06/20) www.islington.gov.uk/~/media/sharepoint-lists/publicrecords/communications/information/adviceandinformation/20192020/20200131state ofequalitiesreport20201.pdf (accessed on 18/06/20) https://dera.ioe.ac.uk/4386/2/Raising_the_attainment_of_minority_ethnic_pupils_sch ool_and_LEA_responses.pdf (accessed on 18/06/20).