Social Class and Educational Attainment

Social Class and Educational Attainment

______

1. Distinguish between Material and Cultural Factors

Material Factors / Cultural Factors

1. How Do Different Factors Affect Educational Attainment

Factor / How it Affects Educational Attainment

1. Different explanations for how social class affects educational attainment

Home / School / Social Class Structure

1. Do You Know your Studies

Study / Findings / Criticisms
Douglas
Bernstein
Hyman
Sugarman
Murray
Becker
Bourdieu
Hargreaves
Lacy
Ball
Hasley,Heath and Ridge
Drew and Gray
Jesson et al
Keddie
Hargreaves and Lacy
Woods

1. Explain the following terms

Term / Explanation
Educational attainment
Cultural Deprivation
Material Deprivation
Labelling
Self Fulfilling Prophecy
Subculture
Anti School Culture
Hidden Curriculum
Formal Curriculum
Banding and Streaming
Cultural Capital
Material Factors
Cultural Factors
Differential Socialisation
Restricted Code
Elaborated Code
Cultural Deficit Model
Homogeneous
Fatalistic
Deferred Gratification
Equality of opportunity (Soft Definition)
Equality of Opportunity (Hard definition)

1. Studies

Study / Findings / Date / Theory Adopted / Method Used / One Criticism
Douglas
Bernstein
Hyman
Sugarman
Murray
Becker
Bourdieu
Hargreaves
Lacy
Ball
Hasley,Heath and Ridge
Drew and Gray
Jesson et al
Keddie
Hargreaves and Lacy
Woods

Extra Notes on Education and Social Class

Social Class and Educational Attainment - The Evidence

General agreement in Western Societies that education should be based on equality of opportunity, e.g., 11+

However the evidence shows that people with certain social characteristics tend to do better than others with regard to educational attainment

The higher a person’s social class, the greater number and higher level of educational qualifications

Social Trends (1994) shows that 32% of those with degrees had fathers with professional backgrounds whereas only 3% of degree holders had fathers who were unskilled manual workers

General Household Survey

Annual survey carried out by the Office of Population Censuses and Surveys

1991-92 Survey based on 19,039 people aged 16 and over

Results show a correlation between social class and educational attainment

This reflects the results of the survey since it was started in 1971

Sociological Surveys

Show significant class differences in educational attainment (as measured by qualifications)

Educational reform seems to be powerless to effect this social fact

Evidence from the 1990’s shows similar results, e.g., Lesson and Gray

Close relationship between social class and GCSE grades

Children whose parents had professional jobs averaged 5.7 GCSE’s with grades A-C

Those whose parents had clerical jobs averaged 2.9

Those who parents had manual jobs averaged 1.2.

Egerton and Hasley (1993) (Sociology in Perspective, pp. 198-99)

Did a study on access to higher education and found that despite the fact that there is a broader access to higher education social class is the still the most important determinant of educational attainment. Despite the expansion of the education system, relative chances have remained the same

Summary of Relevant Evidence

At all the stages of education, students from working class backgrounds achieve less than their middle class counterparts. Even when the former have the same level of intelligence as the latter they;

are less likely to be found in nursery schools or pre school groups

are more likely to start school unable to read

are more likely to fall behind in reading, writing and maths skills

are more likely to be placed in lower sets or streams

are more likely to get fewer GCSE’s or low grades

are more likely to leave school at the age of 16

are less likely to go on into A level studies and on to university

Statistics from Northern Ireland (Gallagher and McKeown , 2000)

Show clear link between social background and the 11 Plus results. Majority of pupils in Grammar schools are from non-manual backgrounds and vices versa for Secondary Schools.

GradeNon Manual Manual

Grade A7624

Grade B13447

Grade B24555

Grade C13961

Grade C24140

Grade D2773

Material and Cultural Factors

Material Factors

Educational attainment rises with family income

Is lack of money a major cause of inequality of educational opportunity?

The Costs of Education

Halsey, Heath and Ridge (1980) - Origins and Destinations

Investigated two issues

To what extent the educational system had achieved its professed goal of meritocracy

To test Bourdieu’s theory of cultural capital, i.e., that while schools appear fair and meritocratic, in reality they privilege pupils with the requisite cultural capital

Despite the expansion of the educational system, relative chances remained the same. Before the 1944 educational act, Service class men were eight times more likely than working class men to go to university, this increased to 8.5 times after 1944

Over 75% of working class students left school at minimum age while over 75% of service class stayed in school. Main reason for difference was money. Lack of maintenance grants for 16-18 year olds was a major factor in educational inequality.

The two systems of education, private and state, remained divided along class lines

They did however find a large volume of intergenerational educational mobility, which meant that cultural capital was not an exclusive means of cultural reproduction of social classes

Living Conditions

These may have important consequences on educational attainment

Douglas (1964) - The Home and the School

Traced educational careers of 5,362 children born in first week of March 1964, through primary school

Divided them into two groups based on living conditions

Found a correlation between living conditions and educational attainment

Impoverished home background also seemed to have a cumulative effect, e.g., it increased over time

Poor living conditions can lead to ill health, absence from school and so on

Cultural Factors – See Douglas, Sugarman etc.

Cultural Deprivation Theory

What is it? Those at the bottom of the class system are deprived of or are

Deficient in certain values, attitudes and skills, which are essential to educational success. Includes, lack of ambition, lack of encouragement, lack of stimulation, the effect of this disadvantage is cumulative. This kind of theory can be seen as the basis for compensatory education and positive discrimination, e.g., Operation Head Start, Educational Priority Areas

Criticisms of Cultural Deprivation Theory

Many criticise this theory, e.g., do working class children leave school early simply because there is a deficient culture of education in the home?

It could be explained in terms of economic disadvantage, i.e., the family need the extra income in order to survive

Class differences in culture seem to be slight and insignificant

Few employment opportunities for children who leave school early

In Douglas’s study lack of participation by parents in school activities could be explained by such things as shift work, also the middle class culture of the school could inhibit working class people. A failure to attend school events is not necessarily a sign of lack of parental interest in education

Methodological Criticisms of Cultural Deprivation Theory

The way working class people behave may not be the result of a sub culture but due to the fact that they are unable to express mainstream’s society’s norms and values because of situational constraints, e.g., lack of money

Content of working class culture is derived from interviews and questionnaires but these responses may not be an accurate account of how people behave in everyday situations

Criticisms of Compensatory Education

Does not do enough to overcome fundamental inequalities

Material versus Cultural Factors

Hasley, Heath and Ridge attempted to measure the effects of cultural and material factors

Both material and cultural factors influenced the type of secondary school the boy went to

At secondary school cultural factors had little effect on educational attainment

Students from working class backgrounds who stayed on after 16 were almost as successful as those from Service Class backgrounds

The higher proportion of those from service class backgrounds who stayed on was due to material factors

The Class Structure and Educational Attainment

Raymond Boudon - Positional Theory

Inequality of educational opportunity is inevitable in a class-based society

People start their educational careers from different positions in the class

System

Costs and benefits of education are different depending on a person’s starting point

Greater pressure on upper class students to select higher-level courses

A working class student taking a degree course will involve moving away from their social background

Pierre Bourdieu - Cultural Capital

This approach is strongly influenced by Marxism

The dominant culture in the society tends to be that of the upper class

People with power are able to define it as such

This puts people from the lower classes at a disadvantage

Dominant culture is ‘cultural capital’ because it can be converted into material reward, e.g., high qualifications etc

Cultural Capital includes such things as knowledge, skills with language, familiarity with ‘high’ culture etc.

Education system reproduces the dominant culture

Basil Bernstein

Developed a theory which relates social class, family relationships, forms of social control, speech patterns and educational experience

This is another example of the cultural deprivation theory

Class, Educational Attainment and Schools

This represents an alternative type of approach and is more of an interactionist approach. Looks at the organisation of the school and the teacher’s role in differential educational achievement. This is more of an interactionist perspective. (See Notes on Interpretive approach to Education)

Type and Quality of School

In general the evidence suggests that schools can make a difference but they do not remove class difference in attainment. See studies by Rutter (1979) and the Inner London Education Authority, 1986)

AS Sociology of Education – Independent Study Guidep.1