EDUCATION - HOW SOCIAL CLASS IMPACTS ATTAINMENT Flashcards
overview:
social class differences can be explained by both home life and processes in schools
->home life has an influence on both material factors and cultural factors
->processes in school such as labelling, SFP, setting and also pupil subcultures all impact attainment as a result of social class differences
attainment patterns in regards to social class
->social class differences are measured from as early as 22 months
->working class children are more likely to start school unable to recite their name and address, or simple nursery rhymes
->working class children are slower to read and write
->they generally do worse in SATs tests
->they are more likely to be placed in lower sets
->they get fewer GCSEs and fewer higher grades
->they are more likely to leave education early
->generally, middle class individuals do better in the education system than their working class counterparts
->on avg. 40% of the overall gap between disadvantaged 16 year olds and their peers has already emerged by age 5, their gaps are particularly pronounced in early language and literacy
->by age 3, the most disadvantaged children are, on avg, already almost 18 months behind heir more affluent peers in their early language development
->around 2/5 of disadvantaged 5 y/o’s are not meeting the expected literacy standard for their age
material factors (home)
->material capital refers to the economic resources that people have access to
->many sociologists say that material deprivation is a major contributor to underachievement in education
MATERIAL DEPRIVATION/DEFICIT
->very small houses and overcrowded accommodation
->lower quality schools and lack of safe spaces nearby
->eating whatever they can afford and using food banks
->no access to laptops/internet=worse at education, no access to healthcare=more time off school when sick
->no places to do homework
MATERIAL ADVANTAGE/CAPITAL
->big house= big rooms= more study space and high self esteem
->connected community, better quality schools and recreation
->children are more focused in school when they’re not hungry
->access to private schools, access to healthcare=less time off school when sick, access to tutoring for school
->extra curricular activities
IMPORTANCE OF MATERIAL FACTORS:
-SHROPSHIRE AND MIDDLETON (1999):
->children are aware of, and sensitive to, their parents poverty
->they found that older children in poor families lowered their career aspirations and wanted to earn a wage as fast as possible
-FORSYTHE AND FURLONG (2000(:
->the costs f higher education and the prospect of debt are putting some bright working class students off pursuing higher education
->the poorest students in higher education tend to work the most hours in part time jobs
-PAYNE (2001):
->middle class families placed a high value on further education
->at A level, the greater prosperity of middle class parents allowed them to push children of moderate intelligence higher than bright working class children by paying for tutors, etc
->middle class parents are more likely to discourage work and provide financial support instead
cultural deprivation (home)
->cultural deprivation is a theory developed in the 1960s, and remains popular among the New Right to this day
->it suggests that working class children lack the norms, values, attitudes, and behaviours that lead to academic success
CULTURAL DEPRIVATION
->VALUES: believe in fate; they do not take an interest in their children’s studies, providing no motivation
->NORMS: read pop literature, watch soap operas, holiday at home (if any), their culture is not recognised in middle class schools so they don’t “fit in”
->LANGUAGE (RESTRICTED CODE): vocab=short sentences and gestures, this leaves them feeling excluded from school activities (due to not being able to understand), which lowers their success
->ASPIRATIONS: parents cannot understand their child’s homework and are not confident to speak to school staff, they prioritise instant gratification from a job rather than further education
CULTURAL ADVANTAGE:
->VALUES: believe in hard work and push their children to succeed, they help motivate their child to the best of their ability
->NORMS: reading non-fiction, watching documentaries, going on holiday abroad, they have “cultural capital” (social assets that promote success) and are independent and confident
->LANGUAGE (ELABORATED CODE): wide vocab, speaking in long sentences, elaborated code is used in exams so children feel confident in applying it themselves
->ASPIRATIONS: parents can help with homework, they feel comfortable talking to school staff to organise opportunities, children are encouraged to pursue higher education
HYMAN
->says that the working class create a “self imposed barrier to success”
->culturally, they tend to be “short term orientated” and “perceive their own position pessimistically”
SUGARMAN:
->the working class norms and values are shaped y the nature of the work they do
->in his eyes, their working situation often let the working class to:
–>be FATALISTIC (believing that social problems are simply inevitable, leading to a lack of effort as they believe in fate)
–>relate more to INSTANT GRATIFICATION (to demand pleasure immediately rather than waiting for better quality rewards, eg. going straight to work rather than pursuing higher education and getting a better job later)
–>believe in COLLECTIVE ACTION (actions taken by a group of people to achieve a common goal, eg. strikes for wage increase)
DOUGLAS:
->based on a questionnaire given to 5000 parents, his research suggested that: in general, middle class parents showed more interest in their child’s education than working class parents, and were more likely to visit the school (go to parent’s evenings)/encourage their children to pursue higher education, therefore, their children were more likely to have higher attainment
language codes (Bernstein)
->language codes are an example of where cultural differences may contribute to greater or lesser academic success
->Bernstein (1973) argued that the working class and middle class used different language codes, saying that one wasn’t superior to the other, but that the education system uses one but not the other.
RESTRICTED CODE:
->a kind of shorthand speech, usually found in conversation between people who have a lot in common (eg. friends and family)
->often tied to a context and can’t be fully understood outside the family circle as it’s meanings tend to be specific to the speaker and the listener
->sentences are simple and short, details omitted. assumed knowledge shared between speaker and listener
ELABORATED CODE:
->spells out what the restricted code takes for granted
->meanings are made explicit, explanations and details are provided
->elaborated code tends to be context free and it’s meanings are universalistic (understood by everyone)
HOW MAY THIS DISADVANTAGE CERTAIN SOCIAL CLASSES IN THE EDUCATION SYSTEM?
->according to Bernstein, most middle class children have been socialised in BOTH restricted AND elaborates codes, and are fluent in each, whereas working class children are limited to restricted code
->since teachers use elaborated code, working class students are placed at a distinct disadvantage: they are less likely to understand what the teacher is saying and are more likely to be misunderstood and criticised for the way they speak
->Bernstein insists that working class speech patterns are NOT substandard or inadequate; however, they do place working class pupils at a disadvantage as elaborated code is the language of education
labelling theory and the self fulfilling prophecy
BECKER (1971)
->studied the way teachers classify pupils based on preconceived ideas of them
->teachers held a common image of the “ideal type” of student, who was intelligent, motivates, polite, and well-behaved
->there was a clear link with social class as middle class pupils were the most likely to fit this “ideal student”
->Becker argued that such labels created a “self-fulfilling prophecy” in which pupils behaved in ways that matched the teacher’s view of them
ROSENTHAL AND JACOBSON (1968)
->conducted a study called “Pygmalion in the Classroom” to measure the impact of teacher expectations
->teachers were told the names of 20% of students who were showing “unusual potential for academic growth”, these pupils were selected randomly and called the “spurters”
->they found that when they tested these students again several months later, that the “spurters” did, in fact, achieve higher IQ scores
->they claimed that, due to them being labelled as the “spurters”, the teachers had given these students higher expectations, more praise, and more attention
->therefore, higher teacher expectations caused higher attainment
the effects of setting and streaming (Ball)
->the way a school is organised is also a mechanism for labelling pupils
->in a study by STEPHEN BALL (1981): “Beachside Comprehensive”, he looked at the impact of setting, where pupils were places into 3 bands based on info received from their primary schools
->there were a disproportionate number of children from middle class homes placed into the top bands
->those in the top band continued to conform and work hard as the year went on, but pupils in the middle band had deteriorating attendance, poor academic performance, and an increase in disciplinary problems. The third band was generally pupils with special needs
->Ball became convinced that this was due to differing teacher expectations
->he suggested that the top band was “warmed up” whereas the lower bands were “cooled down”: the top sets experienced higher expectations and were willing to learn because of better conduct. Bottom sets experienced lower expectations and teachers spent more time controlling students with behavioural issues
pupil subcultures (Paul Willis)
->Willis conducted his study “Learning to Labour”, 1977, in a West Midlands school on a group of working class boys to try to understand the phenomena of working class male underachievement
->Willis argued that the lads he observed were deliberately failing themselves in recognition of the inevitable manual working future that awaited them
->their fatalistic attitudes prevented aspirations beyond working class jobs
->the boys decided “having a laugh” was the best way to deal with school
->they showed replication of the working class “factory floor” culture, which they will become part of after school
stats to show contemporary patterns of attainment (social class)
->in 2014/15, 33% of pupils on FSM achieved 5 or more A*-C GCSEs (including maths and English), compared to 61% of non-FSM pupils
->in 2011/12, just 11% of students offered places at Oxford came from manual occupational backgrounds, 14% at Uni of Bristol, total figure was 32%
->in 2016, the % of students from poorer backgrounds at 7/24 top unis had fallen
->Sutton Trust reports that:
–>7% of all UK pupils attended private school
–>18% of those taking A levels are at private schools
–>34% of Oxbridge applications are from private schools
–>42% of Oxbridge places go to private school pupils
