The Social Structure In English Schools - General Discussion

FastEddie · 16-12-2003, 14:02

Just some FE musings to promote healthy debate...

---

It's generally held as truth over this side of the pond that American high schools have a rigidly-defined, universal caste system that governs every single young person's experience of their teenage years.

In short, the group is ruled by the jocks and the cheerleaders, with the prom king and prom queen the absolute highest of the high.

Underneath the top strata of "the 'in' crowd" there are the alternative kids, who embrace some of the following: indie music, skate clothing, drugs, underage sex or art classes. Alongside the punkers and rockers there are the 'nice kids' - not the brains, not the prom queens, not the rebellious type, but those who generally get on with some or all of the other groups.

And then there is the underclass. The geeks. The nerds. The mathletes. The smelly. The poor. The audio-visual club members. The utterly anti-social.

Again, from a purely British point of view, these strata do not only exist throughout the US, but the general rule is that the jocks pick on the nerds, the alternatives hate the straights and the cheerleaders are simultaneously what everybody else wants to be and what everybody else hates.

In England, the social order of a secondary school is, to my mind, very different:

On top of the pile we have the school soccer team. The guys in the footy team are among the most popular and are the only legitimate partners for the popular girls. These girls are drawn from a combination of sources. The sporty girls (e.g the school hockey or netball team) make up a core of this group, alongside the girls who have started puberty early (but not those who are already having sex at age 12). Typical traits are group crushes on Sixth Form Boys (US readers note: Sixth Form corresponds to junior and senior year) or young teachers, daily use of make-up at school, immensely short skirts (US readers note: Most of us still wear school uniforms).

Somewhat intertwined with the 'top boys' are the Hard Lads. These are usually not as obviously 'cool' as the alpha males, but are usually physically imposing and prone to handing out beatings on the school field. They are mostly of reduced intellect, but are the scourge of all boys who do not rank at least equal to them on the social scale.

Girls, too, have a significant presence in this stratum. The Rough Girls are usually to be found smoking, skipping classes, bullying smaller and smarter girls, and generally acting objectionably. Although they are shunned entirely by the 'top girls', they do not adopt alternative styles of dress. Instead, they are characterised by cheap jewellery, permed hair, loud sportswear and an aggressive demeanour.

Few and far between in the early years of secondary school, but increasingly apparent as the group grows older, the alternative kids are another important group. In many ways they correspond to their peers in the US - borrowing many cues from across the pond, they wear baggy clothes, listen to Limp Bizkit or Slipknot, sport goth-style makeup and have a general distaste for the social climbing and what they see as the vacuous striving for popularity amongst their peers. Unlike how we perceive the States to be, however, this group contains drama geeks, band geeks, and every other lower-order group whose remit is not intellectual.

Finally, we have the 'untouchables'. These comprise the brains, the socially gauche, the poor, the late-developers and the dweebs. There is as much a culture of bullying and repression in British schools as there is in American, but it doesn't come from the same source. However, none of the above groups (with notable exceptions from the alternative group) mix socially with this final group.

I'm noding this partly to gain an understanding of whether my preconceptions about American high school social structure are valid or not. Certainly, I don't think there is such a groundswell of resentment about school here that there is over there. Even those who were assured of their place at the bottom of the social order seem to have at least some happy memories of school. But then again, I am speaking as a student who was a member of the school football team, got great grades throughout, did lots of drama and listened to Green Day *and* 2Pac - so I guess my views are tainted by not being exculsively a member of one social group. Am I just spitting out the Hollywood version of American social structure?

iain · 16-12-2003, 14:27

so in a nutshell, teenagers tend to form groups or cliques based on their immediate social peers, and victimise and/or despise groups of which they are not a part, or would on some level like to be a part?

actually, thats what I like about anthropology / social psychology - the way it states the bleedin' obvious, but is actually hugely interesting at the same time.

Iain

NoDoubtJess · 16-12-2003, 17:36

I think you are right. But I think there are a lot of kids that don't fit into any of those groups. Also, there is a lot of racial division (well, there was at my high school).

Verence · 31-03-2006, 11:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by FastEddie

Just some FE musings to promote healthy debate...

---

Finally, we have the 'untouchables'. These comprise the brains, the socially gauche, the poor, the late-developers and the dweebs. There is as much a culture of bullying and repression in British schools as there is in American, but it doesn't come from the same source. However, none of the above groups (with notable exceptions from the alternative group) mix socially with this final group.

Then there is a group which might be described as the Shadow People. These are the people that are never going be cool enough to part of the in-crowd and are not nerdy enough to be in the nerd herd. They go through high school generally keeping their head down and being ignored. BTW this idea wasn't mine. Someone mentioned during a discussion on a "Lost" message board

PamelaL · 31-03-2006, 11:00

It's like a time warp.

Muggsy · 31-03-2006, 11:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by PamelaL

It's like a time warp.

I know.

For one glorious, hopeful moment I thought Eddie was back.

PamelaL · 31-03-2006, 11:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Muggsy

I know.

For one glorious, hopeful moment I thought Eddie was back.

I tell you what, this forum could do with him at the moment.

maimou · 31-03-2006, 11:11

In my school it was the basketball team that comprised the most popular boys, but otherwise, yep, all true.

DaisyBumbleroot · 31-03-2006, 12:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by FastEddie

Just some FE musings to promote healthy debate...

....Am I just spitting out the Hollywood version of American social structure?

Yep, You have been watching far too many films.

Plus, most people dont fit into just one of your boxes. Did you not do Venn diagrams in maths?

Chie · 31-03-2006, 12:39

I don't really fit into a group. I might be classed as an Untouchable (or Shadow Person as someone said) but I am quite out there

I don't mix with the nerds or the alternatives (I assume that means music students - I certainly can't stand them!). I stay clear of bitchy girls. There are sporty people at our college and I like them but they don't like to interact with me

Ceza · 31-03-2006, 12:40

the 'popular' boys were the cleverest and best looking at my school. same with the girls

Milky Joe · 31-03-2006, 12:43

Blimey i thought FE was back then

Hathor · 31-03-2006, 12:47

Woohoo, FastEddie talking about schoolgirls, now there's a surprise

Pamela, you are right about him and wishing he came back, and I'd add belzebub's canine to that list. But I digress, I should not be talking about such things

(p.s. I do remember him, as I was here under a difefrent identity in the dim past - never got banned or anything though

)

DaisyBumbleroot · 31-03-2006, 12:47

Well, I was a brain and popular. Plus I smoked and nicked off. And I was into rock. Ven diagrams in motion.

trash80 · 31-03-2006, 13:10

i was an untouchable

_drak · 31-03-2006, 13:23

Popularity in many English schools is directly proportional to number of ASBOs you attain.

JonDoe · 31-03-2006, 13:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Exulus

Blimey i thought FE was back then

Me too.

Peachie · 23-04-2006, 10:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaisyBumbleroot

Well, I was a brain and popular. Plus I smoked and nicked off. And I was into rock. Ven diagrams in motion.

I have to say I was the same, brain but quite popular, smoking, nicking off, rock etc.

In Britain there are strong cliques but generally in a completely different way to over in the States. Also, I was at a fee-paying school and noticed that the cliques there were different to the state school cliques nearby where I had one or two friends.

donlothario · 23-04-2006, 11:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by VERENCE

Then there is a group which might be described as the Shadow People. These are the people that are never going be cool enough to part of the in-crowd and are not nerdy enough to be in the nerd herd. They go through high school generally keeping their head down and being ignored. BTW this idea wasn't mine. Someone mentioned during a discussion on a "Lost" message board

Would that group just be in fact the normal kids who don't display homicidal tendencies?

Actually it is a bit sad that peple feel the need to define themselves by groups. What happened to being an individual?

DaisyBumbleroot · 23-04-2006, 11:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by donlothario

Would that group just be in fact the normal kids who don't display homicidal tendencies?

Actually it is a bit sad that peple feel the need to define themselves by groups. What happened to being an individual?

Its that old thing isnt it though. People like to belong to groups. Even those that "Never Fit In" like belonging to the "I dont fit in", "misfit" group!

And we all know steroetypes exist because people fit into them, but scratch below the surface and you find that people rarely are a true sterotype and they also fit into other groups as well.

Everyone is an indivdual automatically, but birds of a feather and all that...

blueblade · 23-04-2006, 11:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by iain

so in a nutshell, teenagers tend to form groups or cliques based on their immediate social peers, and victimise and/or despise groups of which they are not a part, or would on some level like to be a part?

actually, thats what I like about anthropology / social psychology - the way it states the bleedin' obvious, but is actually hugely interesting at the same time.

Iain

Absolutely spot on.

For once iain & I are in total accord. Although I appreciate this was written well over two years ago.

Joe'sgirl · 23-04-2006, 11:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by iain

so in a nutshell, teenagers tend to form groups or cliques based on their immediate social peers, and victimise and/or despise groups of which they are not a part, or would on some level like to be a part?

actually, thats what I like about anthropology / social psychology - the way it states the bleedin' obvious, but is actually hugely interesting at the same time.

Iain

Ahem.

My Soc. Psy. Prof. told me that he loved his subject because it wasn't [bleedin'] obvious. It is and was intriguing. Read a little deeper, my friend.

Nuttin?....Moscovici?.... to name but two.

I think what is being discussed here is an extension of the "us" and "them" scenario - and the 'seductive' influence of group membership.

lemoncurd · 23-04-2006, 15:54

So, have they given up fagging at schools since I left then? That's what determines social precidence, surely?

iain · 24-04-2006, 08:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by blueblade

Absolutely spot on.

For once iain & I are in total accord. Although I appreciate this was written well over two years ago.

you make it sound as tho' we've disagreed on lots of things... :

(haven't we just disagreed on about two things, but done so about a hundred times?)

Iain

iain · 24-04-2006, 08:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe'sgirl

Ahem.

My Soc. Psy. Prof. told me that he loved his subject because it wasn't [bleedin'] obvious. It is and was intriguing. Read a little deeper, my friend.

Nuttin?....Moscovici?.... to name but two.

I think what is being discussed here is an extension of the "us" and "them" scenario - and the 'seductive' influence of group membership.

is it really that much of a revelation that people of similar interests will congregate together?

or that people in general like the social security that being part of a group provides?

the psychology behind it may be more complex, but the end result is still fairly unsurprising.

Iain

16-12-2003, 14:02	#1
FastEddie Banned User Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Here? In this girls' boarding school? With my reputation? What were they thinking? Services: 1 mile and 28 miles on the M1, 17 miles on the M62 Posts: 3,393	The Social Structure In English Schools Just some FE musings to promote healthy debate... --- It's generally held as truth over this side of the pond that American high schools have a rigidly-defined, universal caste system that governs every single young person's experience of their teenage years. In short, the group is ruled by the jocks and the cheerleaders, with the prom king and prom queen the absolute highest of the high. Underneath the top strata of "the 'in' crowd" there are the alternative kids, who embrace some of the following: indie music, skate clothing, drugs, underage sex or art classes. Alongside the punkers and rockers there are the 'nice kids' - not the brains, not the prom queens, not the rebellious type, but those who generally get on with some or all of the other groups. And then there is the underclass. The geeks. The nerds. The mathletes. The smelly. The poor. The audio-visual club members. The utterly anti-social. Again, from a purely British point of view, these strata do not only exist throughout the US, but the general rule is that the jocks pick on the nerds, the alternatives hate the straights and the cheerleaders are simultaneously what everybody else wants to be and what everybody else hates. In England, the social order of a secondary school is, to my mind, very different: On top of the pile we have the school soccer team. The guys in the footy team are among the most popular and are the only legitimate partners for the popular girls. These girls are drawn from a combination of sources. The sporty girls (e.g the school hockey or netball team) make up a core of this group, alongside the girls who have started puberty early (but not those who are already having sex at age 12). Typical traits are group crushes on Sixth Form Boys (US readers note: Sixth Form corresponds to junior and senior year) or young teachers, daily use of make-up at school, immensely short skirts (US readers note: Most of us still wear school uniforms). Somewhat intertwined with the 'top boys' are the Hard Lads. These are usually not as obviously 'cool' as the alpha males, but are usually physically imposing and prone to handing out beatings on the school field. They are mostly of reduced intellect, but are the scourge of all boys who do not rank at least equal to them on the social scale. Girls, too, have a significant presence in this stratum. The Rough Girls are usually to be found smoking, skipping classes, bullying smaller and smarter girls, and generally acting objectionably. Although they are shunned entirely by the 'top girls', they do not adopt alternative styles of dress. Instead, they are characterised by cheap jewellery, permed hair, loud sportswear and an aggressive demeanour. Few and far between in the early years of secondary school, but increasingly apparent as the group grows older, the alternative kids are another important group. In many ways they correspond to their peers in the US - borrowing many cues from across the pond, they wear baggy clothes, listen to Limp Bizkit or Slipknot, sport goth-style makeup and have a general distaste for the social climbing and what they see as the vacuous striving for popularity amongst their peers. Unlike how we perceive the States to be, however, this group contains drama geeks, band geeks, and every other lower-order group whose remit is not intellectual. Finally, we have the 'untouchables'. These comprise the brains, the socially gauche, the poor, the late-developers and the dweebs. There is as much a culture of bullying and repression in British schools as there is in American, but it doesn't come from the same source. However, none of the above groups (with notable exceptions from the alternative group) mix socially with this final group. I'm noding this partly to gain an understanding of whether my preconceptions about American high school social structure are valid or not. Certainly, I don't think there is such a groundswell of resentment about school here that there is over there. Even those who were assured of their place at the bottom of the social order seem to have at least some happy memories of school. But then again, I am speaking as a student who was a member of the school football team, got great grades throughout, did lots of drama and listened to Green Day and 2Pac - so I guess my views are tainted by not being exculsively a member of one social group. Am I just spitting out the Hollywood version of American social structure?

31-03-2006, 12:47	#13
Hathor Forum Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Babylon and Ting Services: I reject your reality, and substitute my own! Posts: 8,955	Woohoo, FastEddie talking about schoolgirls, now there's a surprise Pamela, you are right about him and wishing he came back, and I'd add belzebub's canine to that list. But I digress, I should not be talking about such things (p.s. I do remember him, as I was here under a difefrent identity in the dim past - never got banned or anything though)

16-12-2003, 14:27	#2
iain Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2000 Location: UK Services: Telewest, Telewest Blueyonder BB, Freeview Posts: 53,185	so in a nutshell, teenagers tend to form groups or cliques based on their immediate social peers, and victimise and/or despise groups of which they are not a part, or would on some level like to be a part? actually, thats what I like about anthropology / social psychology - the way it states the bleedin' obvious, but is actually hugely interesting at the same time. Iain

16-12-2003, 17:36	#3
NoDoubtJess Forum Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: USA Posts: 1,100	I think you are right. But I think there are a lot of kids that don't fit into any of those groups. Also, there is a lot of racial division (well, there was at my high school).

31-03-2006, 11:00	#5
PamelaL Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Worcestershire Posts: 55,230	It's like a time warp.

31-03-2006, 11:11	#8
maimou Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Athens - GR Posts: 8,334	In my school it was the basketball team that comprised the most popular boys, but otherwise, yep, all true.

31-03-2006, 12:39	#10
Chie Banned User Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Nottinghamshire Posts: 3,738	I don't really fit into a group. I might be classed as an Untouchable (or Shadow Person as someone said) but I am quite out there I don't mix with the nerds or the alternatives (I assume that means music students - I certainly can't stand them!). I stay clear of bitchy girls. There are sporty people at our college and I like them but they don't like to interact with me

31-03-2006, 12:40	#11
Ceza Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Gender: Female Location: Walsall, West Midlands Services: Internet addict Posts: 1,152 Blog Entries: 1	the 'popular' boys were the cleverest and best looking at my school. same with the girls

31-03-2006, 12:43	#12
Milky Joe Forum Member Join Date: May 2001 Location: 0.3 units from doom Services: Wii - Ask for wii number! Posts: 17,448	Blimey i thought FE was back then

31-03-2006, 12:47	#14
DaisyBumbleroot Forum Member Join Date: May 2003 Location: Derby, UK Services: sky for tv, 02 for phone, virgin for internet Posts: 14,572	Well, I was a brain and popular. Plus I smoked and nicked off. And I was into rock. Ven diagrams in motion.

31-03-2006, 13:10	#15
trash80 Banned User Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: B'ham / Metro Manila Services: Telewest TV, Phone & BB, DAB Posts: 20,752	i was an untouchable

31-03-2006, 13:23	#16
_drak Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: London Posts: 5,328	Popularity in many English schools is directly proportional to number of ASBOs you attain.

23-04-2006, 15:54	#23
lemoncurd Forum Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Gender: Male Location: Bristol Services: Freeview (Fusion FVRT200 DVR); BeUnlimited 8Mb Posts: 23,327 Blog Entries: 1	So, have they given up fagging at schools since I left then? That's what determines social precidence, surely?