How the ‘outside’ becomes ‘inside’: the social orientation of South African teachers’ expectations for learning Shelly Wilburn Abstract This paper reports on the investigation of teachers’ expectations in two relatively high- performing primary schools in disadvantaged communities in South Africa’s Western Cape province. Expectations are conceptualised as multi-dimensional, based upon school effectiveness research, and explored through Bernstein’s concepts of regulative discourse and expressive order. Interviews with teachers are employed to discern how teachers’ pedagogical beliefs are shaped by their expectations. Findings suggest that teachers’ expectations are shaped by the ideals and values of the surrounding community. An interrelation is found between teachers at each school and between expectation dimensions, which suggests that an ‘expectation orientation’ is present at the level of the school. Comparative analysis reveals that these relatively high-performing primary schools respond to their external environment in different ways. Both schools regulate teaching and learning through forms of high expectation; School 1 relays its community optimism as the school is in open relation to its context, while School 2 remains ‘closed yet within’ its community and fosters pragmatic expectations driven by high teacher accountability. How does the outside become inside, and how does the inside reveal itself and shape the outside? (Basil Bernstein, 1987, p.563) Introduction As the educational system in South Africa continues to progress toward an ideal of egalitarianism through changes in curriculum and policy, forms of social reproduction and very slow change in the majority of the country’s schools persist (Taylor, 2008). Yet, the school has been described as a potential interrupter of social reproduction, which can give students access to other “styles of life” and “modes of social relationships” (Bernstein, 1975, p.33). It is based on this goal of providing opportunity to learn through quality schooling that this paper investigates ‘what works’ in schools that are situated in disadvantaged areas of South Africa’s Western Cape. 88 Journal of Education, No. 58, 2013 Although systemic test results are a limited measure of learning, it is the best and only1 measure in this context for selecting schools. One of the most salient aspects related to academic performance is teachers’ expectations, and much of the relevant literature on teachers’ expectations falls within the school effectiveness tradition of research (e.g. see Brookover, Schweitzer, Schneider, Beady, Flood and Wisenbaker, 1978; Brophy, 1983; Teddlie and Stringfield, 1993; Barone, 2006). This school of thought tends to suggest effective classroom and/or school-level factors in relation to learner performance, yet does not consider how and why the broader community (or society) shapes the inside workings of a school. The joining of two schools of thought, that is, the sociology of education and school effectiveness, allows for a deeper understanding of how a context or environment may shape a school’s ability to produce effective practices that lead to relatively high learner achievement. Expectations are investigated via interviews with teachers in two relatively high-performing primary schools in two, demographically different, disadvantaged contexts in the Western Cape. Each of these relatively high- performing schools is located within a quintile that is demographically similar to the majority of schools in South Africa, that is, Quintiles 2 and 3 (Christie, Butler and Potterton, 2007; Western Cape Education Department (WCED), 2011). While this study does not explicitly focus on literacy, the premise of the research assumes that ‘reading to learn’ is one of the most empowering skills a learner can possess in order to beat the odds of social disadvantage. Therefore, the concept of ‘relatively high-performing’ is based upon each school’s grade 3 and grade 6 provincial-wide 2010 assessment results in1 literacy, as both schools, on average, scored eight points above their district’s average pass rate (WCED, 2011). In what follows, literature from American, British, and South African scholars is adapted for a framework that socially locates expectations and depicts the relation between society, school, teacher, and learner. Results of the study are preceded by a description of each school’s community, supported by context- specific characteristics obtained from the 2001 South African Census and teacher interview data. Each school’s ‘expectation orientation’ is then developed and substantiated by teachers’ collective espoused beliefs related to their students and to their own instruction. Each orientation suggests a distinct relationship between the social condition of the community and the internal ordering of the school. In other words, this paper argues that teachers’ Wilburn: How the ‘outside’ becomes ‘inside’. . . 89 expectations of their students are shaped by their communities, translate into collective beliefs about teaching and learning, and regulate academic achievement. Teachers’ expectations An overview Historically, expectation/school-effectiveness scholars have suggested that intellectual development is a response to what teachers expect and how those expectations are communicated; these expectations are often based on teacher-learner interactions and prior achievement (Rosenthal and Jacobson, 1968; Merton, 1948; Cooper and Good, 1983; Dusek, 1975; Cotton, 1989; Eccles and Wigfield, 1985; Babad, Inbar, and Rosenthal, 1982). More current research conceptualises expectations across multiple dimensions as teachers intrinsically carry beliefs and perceptions about learners as well as self- efficacious beliefs related to effective instruction and curriculum (Rubie- Davies, 2007, 2010; Eccles and Wigfield, 1985; Brophy, 1982). These dimensions have the power to mediate classroom instruction, ultimately impacting on learner performance (ibid.). Rubie-Davies’ (2010) study, regarding students’ attributes and their effects on teachers’ expectations (e.g. student participation in class), concludes: “differential teacher perceptions may mediate the effects of teachers’ expectations particularly when also mediated by differential pedagogical beliefs and instructional practices” (p.132). In other words, there may be a link between perceptions, expectations, and pedagogy. In relation to pedagogy, Watson (2011) investigates teachers’ perceptions of students and suggests that how teachers measure their students’ abilities is closely aligned with their expectations and beliefs that stem from socio-cultural constructs (e.g. the ‘urban’ student). Both studies suggest that teachers’ pedagogy may be influenced by their expectations of learners and that expectations are shaped by cultural constructs or perceptions. In the context of South Africa, several empirical studies suggest that expectations are related to school performance, learner performance, and classroom instruction; that is, achievement is either hindered or supported by teachers’ expectations of their students and/or the school’s expectations of 90 Journal of Education, No. 58, 2013 their teachers (Christie, Butler and Potterton, 2007; Fleisch, 2008; Howie, 2005). Braam’s (2004) study of language policy highlights a Western Cape school’s stratified social arrangement (i.e. Afrikaans/English language streaming) due to the hegemony of English and the Afrikaans stigma of under-achievement. With an emphasis on language and its social and political dimensions, Braam concludes that the perceptions of the community were reflected in the dominant ideology of the school. If schools have the potential to relay ideals and values of the community, then teachers’ pedagogical beliefs may express these expectations. In relation to school ideology, Hoadley (2005) presents a rationale in her PhD dissertation for why differences in pedagogy may be reproduced, relayed by the teacher, and aligned with social class. Her study demonstrates how social solidarities and ideals may shape teachers’ typification of learners and how each typification is dependent on context. It can be surmised from this study that teachers are inherently oriented to ways of thinking/perceiving based upon their social experiences. Put another way, teachers’ social experiences may produce particular expectations. Braam (2004) and Hoadley (2005) contribute insight into the hierarchical relation between societal power, community ideals, school order, teacher perceptions, and learner performance. In addition, these studies suggest an origin for teachers’ expectations (i.e. society), which produces a collective way that teachers understand the external world (Hoadley, 2005). In the next section of this paper, Bernstein’s sociological theory of education is reviewed in relation to how these ‘differential perceptions’ may originate. A sociological framework: locating expectations Bernstein suggests that as teachers’ outside world is shaped, teachers’ inside (school) world is regulated by this shaping, which may affect the structure and transmission of knowledge (1987). To address this relation between ‘outside’ and ‘inside’, Bernstein conceptualises a ‘pedagogic discourse’, or the rules that shape knowledge for the curriculum and its transmission in school, as constituting two discourses: instructional discourse as specialised skills and their relationship to each other, and regulative discourse as moral rules that create order, relations, and identity (1996). Regulative discourse carries what knowledge is recontextualised and how knowledge is transmitted, which essentially translates the dominant values of society Wilburn: How the ‘outside’ becomes ‘inside’. . . 91 (Gamble and Hoadley, 2011). According to Bernstein’s theory, instructional discourse is embedded in the regulative discourse, which means that teachers’ instructional theory may be embedded in their expectations for learning. Therefore, teachers’ regulative discourse is adapted for this study as a carrier of expectations, which relays ‘outside’ or external ideals and values, and shapes pedagogical beliefs. At the level of the school, Bernstein conceptualises an expressive order, where the community and school are bound as a distinct moral collectivity, carrying culture, values, and standards (Atkinson, 1985). Expressive order is a source of social ideologies that orients teachers’ regulative discourse by transmitting valued norms made visible within practices, relationships, activities, procedures, and judgments, such as the school’s notion of acceptable behavior, collective forms of pedagogy, as well as a conceptualisation of an ideal learner (Bernstein, 1975). A valued norm, such as the ideal learner, carries expectations for behavior, performance, and achievement. Valued norms relay expectations of a broader expressive order. I suggest that agents of this expressive order, classroom teachers, relay the valued norms and ideals of the broader environment through their expectations. Based upon the preceding review of empirical research and theoretical concepts, Figure 1 below was developed for this study. The model assimilates expectations into Bernstein’s concepts of expressive order and regulative discourse. The psychology of expectations and the sociology of education align into a psychosocial model, displaying how expectations originate and infiltrate into the school. The ideals, values, and moral order produced by society shape teachers’ psychological expectations across multiple dimensions and on several levels. The model provides an explanation for school-level effects (e.g. relative high-performance in contexts of poverty) and a more exhaustive explanation for how and why the outside community may shape the inside performance of a school. 92 Journal of Education, No. 58, 2013 Figure 1: Psychosocial model for the transmission of expectations SOCIOLOG Y OF EDUCATION SOCIETY values, ideals, order, solidarities production/recontextualization of knowledge COMMUNITY condition, beliefs, relations, order, expectations THE SCHOOL expressive order: conduct, character, ideal learner, order, relations, expectations THE TEACHER reproduction of knowledge instructional/regulative discourse what & how knowledge is transmitted THE LEARNER orientation to literacy consciousness = < ? PSYCHOLOGICAL EXPECTATIONS ORIGIN condition, issues, experiences CULTURAL CONSTRUCTS SCHOOL-WIDE EXPECTATIONS learning potential of student body TEACHERS’ EXPECTATIONS dimensions: perceptions of learner intelligence, characteristics, motivation, modification of curriculum, forms of instruction PEDAGOGICAL BELIEFS ACADEMIC OUTCOMES WCED results The following section discusses the methodological approach for developing a collective expectation orientation at the level of the school and provides an overview of each school’s ‘outside’ context. Interview/census data is then presented to substantiate and explicate each school’s orientation. This paper’s aim is not to suggest one school is more effective than the other; each school is considered independently in order to explore contextual differences in relation to each school’s expectation orientation. Based upon a wealth of literature that regards teachers’ expectations as significant to effective teaching practices, this study infers expectations are related to each school’s relative high performance on the WCED literacy assessment in context specific ways (Barone, 2006; Jensen, 2009; Rubie-Davies, 2007, 2010; Eccles and Wigfield, 1985; Brophy, 1982, 1983; Watson, 2011; Rosenthal and Jacobson, 1968; Merton, 1948; Cooper and Good, 1983; Dusek, 1975; Cotton, 1989). Wilburn: How the ‘outside’ becomes ‘inside’. . . 93 Methodology To access the espoused beliefs of teachers, this study takes a qualitative approach and considers each school as a unique case study. Because schools were selected upon their grade 3 and grade 6 Western Cape Education Department literacy scores, interviews with two grade 3 and two grade 6 teachers were employed at each school. In total, fifteen structured questions were asked of participants, in association with probes to provide more detail. Each interview was recorded, transcribed, and lasted approximately thirty minutes. This study works from the premise that the espoused beliefs of teachers, regarding principles of teaching and learning, authorise access to an external social order inherent within the teacher; therefore, classroom observations of teachers’ enacted instructional practices were not necessarily needed to gather data on their expectations. A multi-dimensional concept of expectations was developed to classify teachers’ beliefs regarding their students and their instruction based upon a review of relevant literature. Dimensions include teachers’ espoused perceptions related to learner intelligence, the ideal learner, curriculum modifications, the degree of an individualising pedagogy, the degree of intrinsic/extrinsic motivational behaviors, the school-wide learning potential, and the community condition. The full data set of interview questions classifies teachers’ expectations according to each of these dimensions. Participants were asked questions such as, ‘Do you believe all of your students will pass at the end of the year?’ and ‘How would you describe the best learner in your class?’ Teachers’ responses were classified according to a coding scheme, which revealed an interrelation or pattern between teachers at each school and between expectation dimensions. This interrelation suggests the presence of a collective, school-level, expectation orientation (or an expressive order). Each school’s orientation expresses forms of identity in relation to how the ‘outside’ community plays a role in each school’s ‘inside’ order. When these orientations are comparatively analysed between schools, each expectation orientation highlights features that are related to context and relevant to academic success, such as a school’s open or closed relation to its community. The following section introduces each school and its social and contextual characteristics with regards to language, population, transportation, and migration. Due to the critical significance of each school’s context in this 94 Journal of Education, No. 58, 2013 The Department of Education and Training (DET) was the national centralised system of2 education that controlled the curriculum, funding, and operation of ‘Black African’ schools during Apartheid (Kallaway, 2002; Chisholm and Sujee, 2006). study, each school’s description is supported by census data from Statistics South Africa (2001) and interview data. These contextual characteristics are referenced in the discussion of results, particularly when discussing issues that may impact on teaching and learning. Below is a map that contrasts the physical location of the schools. Map of school 1 and school 2 Source: Google Earth, 2013 School 1 and the ‘outside’ Formerly controlled by the Department of Education and Training, and2 located within national Quintile 3, School 1 (S1) rests approximately 15 km outside Cape Town’s urban, metropolitan environment (WCED, 2011). S1 also sits on the edge of a ‘Black’, majority isiXhosa-speaking, working-class township (Statistics SA, 2001). According to the principal, S1 comprises 42 Wilburn: How the ‘outside’ becomes ‘inside’. . . 95 teachers and 1 500 learners; 80% of learners reside in the township while the other 20% travel from nearby townships. Teacher 2 (T2) claims that all learners come from shacks, or commonly referred to by the locals as ‘squatter camps’, and describes the situation as thus: You see, they live in shacks and there’s no space you see? The parents come [home] late; he wants to sleep, so they switch off the lights, and it’s only one room. While the majority of learners live in conditions of poverty, teachers also expressed positive notions of the community in that some parents strongly support their children’s future and desire a better life for them through education. With a population of 49 664, the S1 community utilises numerous forms of transportation: 24% travel by foot, 17% take the city train, and 7% ride in minibus taxis. Other forms of transportation are also employed but to a lesser extent, such as cars at 3% and buses at 1.7% (Statistics SA, 2001). Because public transport is readily available and the travel distance is less than other townships outside the city, Cape Town is more accessible to the S1 community than it is to other smaller rural communities. These forms of transportation provide the capacity for social movement and generate access to Cape Town’s employment opportunities. While 97% of the S1 community speaks isiXhosa, the neighbouring city of Cape Town comprises 1 199 049 people speaking Afrikaans, 808 446 people speaking English, 831 381 people speaking isiXhosa, and the remaining 2% communicate in more than 9 other languages. With regards to social movement, 85% of the S1 community is from the Western Cape province and 15% migrated from the other eight provinces in South Africa. Approximately 3 million people reside in the nearby city of Cape Town, constituting an ethnically diverse population: 48% ‘Coloured’, 32% ‘Black African’, 19% ‘White’, and 1% ‘Indian’ (ibid.). Not to mention, teachers of S1 explained that NGOs are widely present in the S1 community as its urban metro location is a target environment for social and educational support. This brief description of S1 and its context characterises a peri-urban heterogeneous environment that promotes various ways of understanding the outside world. For example, the community’s access to transportation may expose residents to diverse social opportunities, such as employment, and generate an awareness of different economic conditions or standards of living, therefore, creating visible social diversity. As read through the S1 teachers’ 96 Journal of Education, No. 58, 2013 The House of Representatives (HOR) was the national centralised system of education that3 controlled ‘Coloured’ schools’ operation, curriculum, and funding during Apartheid (Kallaway, 2002; Chisholm and Sujee, 2006) espoused beliefs, the community is optimistic regarding the potential success of the school and its learners: [Outside in the community], they’ve got a strong feeling that we are making or trying to produce some better learners. . . I know there’s committees just outside the district of this community, I know they’ve got that trust in us. They believe we can do at least better for their learners. Doing ‘better’ and producing ‘better’ learners denotes a broad social expectation of the school and its role in the community, which is to provide a quality education so that learners may one day positively contribute to society. A relation between community optimism and school optimism is expressed, or in other words, how the ‘outside’ may shape the ‘inside’. School 2 and the ‘outside’ Located on the west coast of South Africa’s Western Cape province is the rural community of S2, approximately 14 km from the closest town of Lutzville, which is relatively small in size. Formerly under the jurisdiction of the House of Representatives, and located in Quintile 2, the school is situated3 in an isolated community that is purely Afrikaans-speaking and ‘Coloured’ in ethnicity (WCED, 2011; Statistics SA, 2001). The West Coast Municipality has a total population of only 282 671, as compared to Cape Town’s 3 million residents (Statistics SA, 2001). Many teachers of S2 grew up in the local community and continue to live in the area raising their families. According to the principal, S2, which is the community’s only primary school, is small in size with only 513 learners and 20 teachers; the majority of learners live in the community, but a small percentage travel from other communities such as Lutzville and Papendorp. It is also important to mention that the current principal of S2 recently replaced the former principal, who was a part of S2 for over 40 years and left a lasting imprint on the ‘culture’ of the school. Teachers of S2 carry a collective sentiment regarding the dissociation between the school and its community. According to T1: The parents are illiterate. That is why [only a few learners read and write outside of school], so schooling stops at school. When the bell rings, teaching or schooling stops. . . Our Wilburn: How the ‘outside’ becomes ‘inside’. . . 97 community, they are very selfish. . .because there’s no work. And those who have money and who have work, they are very selfish. Even though there remains a relatively unsupportive connection between the school and its community, the school acts as a buffer against prevalent social issues, such as fetal alcohol syndrome. FAS is the result of prolonged prenatal exposure to alcohol, and the effects on children vary across a spectrum of cognitive and physical disabilities (Crede, Sinanovic, Adnams and London, 2010). The west coast Winelands of the Western Cape provide considerable amounts of and access to alcohol, and more specifically, wine. Because of the prevalence of FAS and illiteracy, the relation between S2 and its community remains closed. However, because of the isolation and ethnic/language homogeneity of the community, S2 nevertheless remains within and a part of the traditional community culture, keeping social and cultural change static and transmitting local beliefs and values throughout the school. These characteristics express a ‘closed yet within’ relation between S2 and its community. Learners’ positive attitude toward and valuing of their school is a second socio-cultural characteristic that needs mention. Teachers of S2 attribute learners’ respectfulness in school to the community, stemming from a traditional culture, and as a result of the original value system that has been transferred over time from generation to generation within the community: [Our learners] are proud of their school. . . If you walk down [the corridor], I don’t think you will see a piece of paper lying around. They are very proud of their school and they love their teachers. I have a place in my class, a corner, full of letters for me. This transmission of values is related to contextual homogeneity, as exposure to other value systems is sealed off (to a certain degree) by the lack of social movement in and out of the community. As original values and morals are passed down and relayed within the school, attitude and behavior are shaped, thus encompassing a context-specific regulative discourse that carries particular expectations for teaching and learning. With regards to statistical characteristics, S2’s immediate surrounding community contains a population of 355, and 342 of the 355 residents have been residing in the Western Cape since birth (Statistics SA, 2001). One could speculate that these permanent residents may have also been residing in the community since birth due to its isolated and rural location. In addition, over 50% of residents claim that transportation is not applicable to their living 98 Journal of Education, No. 58, 2013 situation, and 28% of the community primarily travels by foot, which leaves the remaining 22% with access to cars, buses, and taxis (ibid.). S2’s community context can be characterised as rural, isolated, depressed, socially immobile, economically stagnant, and under-employed; yet, the community harbors and values respectful character and manner and relays these values in the school. Furthermore, the community shapes the ways teachers account for the lack of social support as well as the ways teachers understand learner ability or intelligence. These understandings are a consequence of the high prevalence of social issues, such as fetal alcohol syndrome and illiteracy. In what follows, a collective, school-level, expectation orientation of both S1 and S2 is presented, which pays attention to the ‘outside’ characteristics of each community and their impact on teachers’ beliefs related to teaching and learning ‘inside’ each school. Results How the ‘outside’ becomes ‘inside’ Three dimensions of expectations and their interrelation are utilised in the following discussion to support each school’s expectation orientation: 1) teachers’ concept of the ideal learner, 2) teachers’ concept of learner intelligence, and 3) the overall school-wide expectations (expressive order) of the student body. School 1 To elicit the expressive order of School 1, teachers were asked, “Does your principal expect all of your learners to pass? and “What does your principal expect from you as a teacher?” Teachers’ remarks reveal a general optimism and espouse a committed energy with a focus on high marks, learner performance, and intervention committees. For example, T4 explains: [The principal] is expecting me to teach the kids, that they must pass, each and every must progress; we must see progression from the learners. Wilburn: How the ‘outside’ becomes ‘inside’. . . 99 T3 elaborates on this optimistic outlook with regards to intervention programs: Of course [the principal] expects them to pass. But he knows the problem. That’s why we are coming up [with programs] as a management [team]. . . that we must use to intervene with those struggling learners. S1 is proactive in its effort to remediate struggling learners; this exhibits a school-wide expectation in which all learners do have the potential to achieve, therefore actions and energy are put forth to support this high expectation for all. A link between the school and the community can be realised here as the broad, external, social optimism may be relayed within the school. In addition, teachers’ remarks suggest their instructional theory of learner remediation is embedded in their high expectations for learning (Bernstein, 1996). An optimistic expectation orientation can be established here, based upon the high community expectations of the school, the high school-wide expectations of the learners, and the implementation of intervention programs espoused by the teachers. Teachers’ concept of an ideal learner was revealed when asked to describe the best learner in their class. S1 teachers’ responses are collective and emphasise what the learner ‘can do’. For example, S1 teachers explain: [My best learner] knows all the work that you do, and you can give them work and within ten minutes she will tell, ‘Miss, I’m finished’. . . They can do the work without being helped, and they can achieve those learning outcomes. . . [The best learners] are the kids who are doing very well; if you give them work or homework, they submit on time. To classify S1 teachers’ concept of an ideal learner in relation to this study’s theoretical framework, Bernstein (1996) offers a useful distinction between two types of pedagogy: a visible pedagogy, where rules are made explicit and expectations are related to learner performance, and an invisible pedagogy, where rules are implicit and expectations are related to learner competence. According to interview data, S1 teachers’ conceptualisation of an ideal learner can be classified as performance-centred; teachers expect learners to produce outcomes that are recognised by explicit marks or academic achievement. This expectation for and emphasis on high achievement most likely stems from external pressures outside the school, that is, the community, the district office, the provincial education department, as well as the neighboring communities who transport their children a considerable distance by taxi or train in order to attend this particular school. Each of these external agents is 100 Journal of Education, No. 58, 2013 situated in close proximity to S1 due to the urban metropolitan environment. S1’s emphasis on performance is related to an external orientation to schooling; teachers and administration are more concerned with that which can be seen, measured, and demonstrated. Furthermore, an external orientation also has implications for teachers’ pedagogy. For example, the implementation of remediation programs and interventions at S1 assumes that if learners are given appropriate support from the teacher(s), then learners’ marks will improve over time toward the desired level of performance. Stemming from teachers’ concept of an ideal learner is teachers’ perception of learner intelligence, that is, the extent to which teachers perceive learners’ abilities as ‘fixed’ (they either have ‘it’ or not) or as ‘incrementally changing’ (all learners can achieve, given appropriate instructional support). The majority of S1 teachers espouse an incremental perception of learner intelligence as they discuss passing at the end of the year, future matriculation potential, and the level of cognitive demand for weak learners. This expectation that all learners have the ability to achieve expresses the optimistic orientation of the school and community. For example, T3 explains: I try and motivate them. I ask them, I ask one of them, to come and read, even the one who can’t read. When you see he’s struggling, I’ll tell him you know what? You did well and you need to practice and then read this thing and come back tomorrow and tell me what you have read about. The expectation that all learners can achieve supports the school’s external, performance-centered, optimistic, and communal orientation. Teachers’ emphasis on high marks and remediation/intervention programs is shaped by the perception that all learners do have the ability to produce desired results when given appropriate support. This orientation can also be linked to the social characteristics of the surrounding context, that is, an urban, heterogeneous, and socially mobile environment. These findings support Bernstein’s theory of the relation between school and society; as teachers’ outside world is shaped by forms of power and control, teachers’ collective values and ideals relay these forms of power, which have the potential to shape their instructional theory in more or less effective ways. This means that teachers’ collective expectations are a relay for these values and ideals, which impact on teachers’ instructional theory. Wilburn: How the ‘outside’ becomes ‘inside’. . . 101 In summary, School 1 produces an expectation orientation regulated by an urban, heterogeneous, and socially mobile context, which allows for a visible society. School 1 can be described as connected to its community through the relation between high external expectations and high internal or school-wide expectations. The prevalence of educational NGOs within the community of S1 further supports this connection. Teachers are orientated to perceive teaching and learning as communal and performance-centered; that is, all learners have the ability to achieve, which can be recognised through high marks or results. School 1’s broad context relays visible diversity and a growing demand for a skilled labour market (City of Cape Town, 2011). The school’s orientation to its environment regulates teachers’ emphasis on performance and what the learner “can do.” School 1 has an optimistic orientation with regards to learner achievement. In sum, these findings suggest that the communal, external, performance-centered, and optimistic orientation of School 1 produces relatively high-performance. In what follows, School 2 expresses an entirely different orientation to expectations. Key differences reveal how school context is related to a school’s expressive order, as well as how a school’s expressive order regulates teachers’ expectations for learning. School 2 S2’s expressive order or school-wide expectations is highly dependent on the social condition of the surrounding community. S2’s small isolated location does not have the same contextual features as that of an urban community school, which provide exposure to diversity and alternative ways of life. Because of the lack of public transport, travel time is much longer to the nearest small town, resulting in a smaller amount of social migration. This immobility contributes toward a homogeneous culture. Furthermore, lack of access to employment due to minimal transport and isolation is associated with a sense of depression. Therefore, the school’s order reflects this condition and compensates for the lack of social support. One of the most significant aspects of S2’s community, as it relates to the school’s expressive order, is the high prevalence of fetal alcohol syndrome. T1 explains why some of her learners will not pass: Say a quarter of them, have, what do you call it in English? FAS? Alcohol Syndrome? See? So other [reasons for why some learners will not pass] are circumstances at home, poverty, mother and father are illiterate, and no work at home. And they are drinking, not interested in the children, don’t even come to school. So [those] are the main reasons. 102 Journal of Education, No. 58, 2013 Because of the depressed environment surrounding the school, S2’s expressive order carries reasonable expectations for learner achievement, which constitutes a more pragmatic orientation to teaching and learning. Based upon interview data, the teachers and principal are acutely aware of the local issues. According to T1: [The principal] knows the circumstances, he knows the people, he knows the vicinity, he knows that OK, maybe it is his desire for the whole school or the whole class to pass, but in the back of his mind he knows that it isn’t possible. This unanimous espoused perception of school-wide achievement produces high teacher accountability. Teachers set and submit quarterly benchmarks and annual goals to the principal for learner improvement in each learning area, along with the instructional strategies associated with each goal. Teachers of S2 are motivated to improve their own performance as well as their learners’. Teachers are committed to education both ‘inside’ and ‘outside’ the school: Some of the students go to high school and we have much interest in them. We ask the teachers there, how they perform, and they know we watch what they are doing. In relation to the presence of teacher accountability, numerous forms of collective expectations of teachers are present in the school, which stem from the former principal’s management of school activity: teachers must always be on time, be at school every day, emphasise time on task in the classroom, genuinely commit to education inside and outside of school, and instruction must be taken seriously. A particular ‘culture’ of teaching and learning is evidenced by these norms and standards for behavior, which shapes teachers’ theory of instruction and produces relatively higher academic outcomes. In contrast to S1’s performance-centered ideal learner with an emphasis on high marks, S2 teachers espouse an emphasis on the internal characteristics of the learners, therefore exhibiting an ideal related to competence. The primary reasons for this emphasis on internal competencies of learners are the presence of FAS, illiterate community residents, and the static culture of the community that inhibits social movement and mobility. Teachers collectively espouse a perception that some learners have what it takes and others do not. For example, teachers may attach certain expectations to an ‘FAS child’, or in other words, teachers may generate a ‘cultural construct’ that carries expectations for particular learners (Watson, 2011). Furthermore, the homogenous context instills a competence-centered ideal learner, as the Wilburn: How the ‘outside’ becomes ‘inside’. . . 103 external environment appears and remains relatively the same; therefore, if a learner does stand out among the rest, it is due to the possession of some internal characteristic that not all learners have. According to T3: [The best learner in my class] is enthusiastic. Also, wants to do more than the others, comes and asks me. . . when he’s finished with his work, he’s also busy reading. And he comes and asks me what does this mean, so enthusiastic. He wants to get the best marks, and he comes and asks me but why is this wrong, what must I do to make it. [He’s] enthusiastic [and] wants to get to the top one day. He tries to do his best. This internal drive to ‘want’ to achieve contrasts with S1 teachers’ performance-centered ideal learner who ‘gets the best marks’. The distinction between ‘gets the best marks’ and ‘wants the best marks’ exhibits the external versus internal orientation to instructional theory and expectations. S2 teachers express a collective value for learners’ internal competencies rather than learners’ external marks or results. In accordance with S2 teachers’ internal orientation, teachers collectively espouse a fixed perception of learners’ intelligence. Teachers believe learners either have the ability or not and support this position regarding why some learners will or will not pass matric with the following reasons: learners’ low literacy skill levels, a lack of internal motivation to learn or desire to achieve/excel in life, fetal alcohol syndrome, and grade retainment. These reasons express the competence-centered ideal learner, the pragmatic orientation of the school as a whole, and an internal expectation orientation that positions learners on a spectrum of able or not able: I say you must do [the task] like this and this and this. Some of them can do it. But the others, but there is some of them who will never get to that level. In contrast, teachers who perceive learner intelligence as incrementally changing (like those of S2) would most likely believe that learners have the ability to achieve; all they need is remediation/intervention, intrinsic motivation, and/or an alternative environment that addresses the effects of FAS. These findings further support Bernstein’s relation between teachers’ instructional theory and collective social ideologies that orient teachers’ regulative discourse; or as this paper argues, the school’s expectation orientation, shaped by the outside context, orients teachers’ instructional theory. 104 Journal of Education, No. 58, 2013 In summary, School 2 is regulated by an invisible society where the community is isolated, rural, and homogenous, lacking social mobility and educational support outside of the school. The community is neither connected nor removed from the school; teachers take responsibility for the lack of outside support, therefore accountability is high. However, S2 remains within a homogenous culture and transmits the shared values and beliefs of the community. An emphasis on internal learner competencies orients teachers’ ideal learner, that is, the learner who ‘wants the best marks’. The extent to which teachers believe learners can overcome social or psychological obstacles in relation to their intelligence or ability to acquire new knowledge and skills is seen as fixed, which further substantiates S2’s internal orientation. This value attached to internal competencies signifies teachers’ attention to those who have what it takes, or in other words, signifies an individualising orientation. Teachers differentiate learners at the level of the individual between those who can and cannot achieve. With regards to the social condition of the community, the prevalence of FAS is a serious issue that must be addressed from both an educational and political standpoint. Although S2’s contextual issues would most likely hinder academic achievement, teachers go the extra mile and take responsibility for their students’ education. In the following section, the relation between ‘outside’ and ‘inside’ is further substantiated through a brief comparative analysis that points to two distinct, context-specific, ideal teachers found in each school. The ideal teacher As teachers carry expectations related to an ideal learner that stem from the expressive order of the community and school, an ideal teacher is similarly formed from the expectations of the community and relayed by the school, e.g. the principal. As suggested throughout this paper, the ‘outside’ has a way of shaping the ‘inside’; because an ideal teacher is produced in context- specific ways, the school’s surrounding environment aids recognition to what is expected of teachers. Firstly, the relationship between the community and the school is significant as it regulates social relations that are relevant to learner achievement. S1 is connected or in open relation to its community through NGO support, optimistic expectations, and visible social mobility/movement. In contrast, S2 is in closed relation to its community yet remains within, due to insufficient secondary sites of academic acquisition. Wilburn: How the ‘outside’ becomes ‘inside’. . . 105 The social immobility of the community results in a static community culture. Therefore, S2 creates a boundary between itself and the community in order to account for that which has been described as depressed and ridden with unemployment, illiteracy, and alcoholism. These types of community-school relations shape the role of the teacher in a particular way that provides what is necessary to most effectively benefit learner academic achievement in that context. The more closed relation between S2 and its community suggests that the ideal teacher is heavily accountable to the learner and responsible for the academic as well as moral development of the student population. In contrast, S1’s open relation to the community, which is more permeable for outside influences on learning (e.g. NGOs), suggests an ideal teacher that holds partial accountability, as teachers believe the community should play a role in the education of its future citizens. In other words, S2 teachers are expected to act as a buffer to society, whereas S1 teachers incorporate society into their instructional theory. These school-community relations exemplify how social context shapes collective expectations that are carried within a school’s expressive order and that these expectations can be realised through particular beliefs related to teaching and learning. Conclusion This paper demonstrates the link between expectations and the sociology of education, as these two schools of thought are often considered separate and distinct from one another. Bernstein’s concepts of expressive order and regulative discourse frame teachers’ expectations theoretically, while expectations are empirically investigated through the ways teachers think about their students and their instruction. Results of the study suggest that teachers’ expectations are context-dependent, socially shaped by the community condition, and collectively shared at the level of the school through an expectation orientation. In addition, results suggest how and why collective expectations may impact on the pedagogical beliefs of teachers. A common thread between S1 and S2 is that both reciprocate their community in ways that parallel the social and cultural condition: S2’s internal, pragmatic, and individualising orientation versus S1’s external, optimistic, and communalising orientation. Although both schools produce distinct forms of expectations, this study infers that both schools regulate teaching and learning through forms of high expectation. S1 relays its community optimism as the school is in open relation to its context, while S2’s ‘closed yet within’ relation 106 Journal of Education, No. 58, 2013 fosters pragmatic expectations under high teacher accountability. Both are forms of high expectations but for different reasons. These forms of high expectation are in fact related to high performance in contexts of poverty. The interrelation between expectation dimensions suggests that teachers in both S1 and S2 are collectively oriented to school in society, and that high achievement is related to compatibility between environment and school order. It may be posited further that school ‘culture’ and community ‘culture’ are more inter-related than previously considered with regards to effective teaching practices. Acknowledgements This paper is based on work conducted within the SPADE research project, which is sponsored by the Department of Higher Education and Training and the Department of Basic Education through the European Union Primary Education Sector Policy Support Program. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the sponsors. References Atkinson, P. 1985. Language, structure, and reproduction. London: Methuen. Babad, E., Inbar, J. and Rosenthal, R. 1982. Pygmalion, Galatea, and the Golem: investigations of biased and unbiased teachers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74(4): pp.450–474. Barone, D. 2006. Narrowing the literacy gap: what works in high poverty schools. New York: The Guilford Press. Bernstein, B. 1975. Primary socialization, language, and education: class, codes and control, volume 3, towards a theory of educational transmissions. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Wilburn: How the ‘outside’ becomes ‘inside’. . . 107 Bernstein, B. 1987. Class, codes, and communication. Sociolinguistics: an international handbook of the science of language and society, volume 1. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Bernstein, B. 1996. The pedagogic device. Pedagogy, symbolic control, and identity. London: Taylor and Francis. Braam, D. 2004. Community perception of change in a school’s language policy. PRAESA Occasional Paper, 21: pp.33–34. Brookover, W., Schweitzer, J., Schneider, J., Beady, C., Flood, P. and Wisenbaker, J. 1978. Elementary school social climate and school achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 15(2): pp.301–319. Brophy, J. 1982. Successful teaching strategies for the inner-city child. The Phi Delta Kappan, 63(8): pp.527–530. Brophy, J. 1983. Research on the self-fulfilling prophecy and teacher expectations. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(5): pp.631–661. Chisholm, L. and Sujee, M. 2006. Tracking racial desegregation in South African schools. Journal of Education, 40: pp.141–159. Christie, P., Butler, D. and Potterton, M. 2007. Schools that work: ministerial committee report. Pretoria: South African Department of Basic Education. City of Cape Town. 2011. State of Cape Town Report 2010. Cooper, H. and Good, T. 1983. Pygmalion grows up: studies in the expectation communication process. New York: Longman Press. Cotton, K. 1989. Expectations and student outcomes. School Improvement Research Series: Close up (7). Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement, US Department of Education. Crede, S., Sinanovic, E., Adnams, C. and London, L. 2010. The utilization of health care services by children with Foetal Alcohol Syndrome in the Western Cape, South Africa. Drugs and Alcohol Dependence, 115: pp.175–182. 108 Journal of Education, No. 58, 2013 Dusek, J. 1975. Do teachers bias children’s learning? Review of Educational Research, 45(4): pp.661–684. Eccles, J. and Wigfield, A. 1985. Teacher expectations and student motivation. In Dusek, J. (Ed.), Teacher Expectancies. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Fleisch, B. 2008. Primary education in crisis: why South African schoolchildren underachieve in reading and mathematics. Cape Town: Juta and Co. Gamble, J. and Hoadley, U. 2011. Positioning the regulative order. In Ivinson, G., Davies, B. and Fitz, J. (Eds), Knowledge and identity: concepts and applications in Bernstein’s sociology. London: Routledge. Google Earth. 2013. Map of School 1 and School 2. Map data: Google, AfriGIS (Pty) Ltd., SIO, NOAA, U.S. Navy, NGA, and GEBCO. Hoadley, U. 2005. Social class, pedagogy, and the specialization of voice in four South African primary schools. Unpublished PhD thesis. Cape Town: University of Cape Town. Howie, S. 2005. System level evaluation: language and other background factors affecting mathematics achievement. Prospects, 35(2): pp.184–185. Jensen, E. 2009. Teaching with poverty in mind: what being poor does to kid’s brains and what schools can do about it. Virginia: ASCD. Kallaway, P. 2002. Introduction. In Kallaway, P. (Ed.), The history of education under Apartheid, 1948–1994: the doors of culture and learning shall be opened. Cape Town: Maskew Miller Longman. Merton, R. 1948. The self-fulfilling prophecy. Antioch Review, 8: pp.193–210. Rosenthal, R. and Jacobson, L. 1968. Pygmalion in the classroom: teacher expectation and pupils’ intellectual development. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc. Wilburn: How the ‘outside’ becomes ‘inside’. . . 109 Rubie-Davies, C. 2007. Classroom interactions: exploring the practices of high- and low-expectation teachers. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77: pp.289–306. Rubie-Davies, C. 2010. Teacher expectations and perceptions of student attributes: is there a relationship? British Journal of Educational Psychology, 80: pp.121–135. Statistics South Africa 2001. Population Census. Cape Town: DataFirst, University of Cape Town [distributor] [Dataset]. Taylor, N. 2008. What’s wrong with South African schools? Presentation to the conference, What’s working in school development? JET Education Services. Teddlie, C. and Stringfield, S. 1993. Schools make a difference: lessons learned from a 10-year study of school effects. New York: Teachers College Press. Watson, D. 2011.