AS Sociology Essay

Douglas is one sociologist in particular who would tend to agree with the
generalisation that working-class underachievement in education is the
result of home circumstances and family background. Douglas feels that
this educational underachievement is maintained due to what he classifies
as poor parental attitudes and encouragement towards the education
system and its functions. He uses evidence of poor parental interest with
regards to lack of attendance at parent teacher meetings and other
functions held by the school which would be in the best interests of the
children if their parents attended. He highlights the fact that parents
of working-class students have poor rates of attendance at these
meetings and thus it comes across as if they are less interested in their
childs educational eperiences and opportunities compared to a middle-
class childs parents who do attend. However some would say that Douglas
view is rather controversial in that he fails to recognise that many of
these parents could be at work when these meetings are scheduled or
perhaps they are looking after children and are unable to find or afford
someone to look after them. So can we really say that working class
underachievement is a result of home circumstances and family
background as sociologists such as Douglas suggest!
"ewson and "ewson would also agree with the statement that working-
class underachievement in education is the result of home circumstances
and family background. #hrough their study of child-rearing practices$
they found that parental skills found within working-class families were
poor in comparison with those that were evident within middle-class
families were child-centeredness is apparent. #hey found that middle-
class parents got more involved in learning through play$ monitoring
educational progress and encouragement through visits to the library$
museums and galleries etc. #hey believe that this places middle-class kids
at an advantage when it comes around the time for them to start school.
Again it is possible to say that it may well perhaps be down to the fact
that money may be restricting them from attending museums etc not the
fact that they simply dont care as much as middle-class parents as some
sociologists appear to highlight.
Declan %agennis &'(') Sociology Essay
*sing material from +tem A and elsewhere$ assess the view that working-
class underachievement in education is the result of home circumstances and
family background
%urray and %arsland would also agree with this broad statement. #hey
also like Douglas$ "ewson and "ewson pinpoint parents and the ,uality of
home life to blame for working-class underachievement within the
education system. %urray and %arsland argue that the so called
underclass is made up of parents who are afraid of work$ are more of
ten than not welfare dependant and according to them they are
inadequate in terms of transmitting positive values and norms to their
children during the process of primary socialisation regarding education
and the opportunities it may offer them in the future. %urray and
%arsland can be criticised for making very general assumptions regarding
working-class families and how they operate with regards to the
education system. #hey fail to acknowledge that many parents from
working-class families do work and moreover have high levels of double
-obs in order to be able to support their family. %any of them are also
not welfare dependant and either work or take care of the children at
home. So is it fair to say for %urray and %arsland to say that they are
inade,uately preparing children for education! %any of them actually
encourage their children to work at school as they are aware of the
opportunities it will open for them and inform them on what they have
previously missed out on. So is it really fair to make comparisons to
middle-class families who find it easier to provide these educational
resources and then blame working-class families because they find it
difficult to live up to middle-class standards!
#he feminist sociologist %elanie .hilips would also agree with this
statement. She states that modern family life in /ritain is characterised
by a rapidly increasing number of broken families in which effective
socialisation has been disrupted and disordered. She is in the opinion that
inade,uate parenting among one parent$ reconstituted families and
cohabiting couples. She points out that working-class families have high
levels of these broken families and thus their underachievement is caused
by the family disruption and disorder. 0hile .hilips makes a valid point
she fails to take into consideration the fact that many children strive and
work hard at school despite being part of these family structures. So is it
correct to say that working-class underachievement is caused by home
circumstances and family background!
/ernstein focuses on the concept of cultural deprivation and how this
has been an influential factor on educational achievement. /ernstein
points out that working-class children are linguistically deprived due to
the fact that they use a restricted code in contrast to middle-class
children who use a more elaborated one. He feels that this places them at
an advantage as they are able to meet the demands of what teachers and
Declan %agennis &'(') Sociology Essay
eaminations ask of them as they understand what is being re,uested.
0orking-class students on the other hand find this difficult as they have
been brought up with linguistic deprivation. As a result they find school
and the tasks demanded a tricky concept to grasp. 0hile /ernstein would
generally agree that factors such as home-life and background contribute
to underachievement among the working-class he has been criticised for
his theory. 1abov suggests that middle-class language codes are over
rated and /ernstein offers little concrete evidence to back up his claims.
2urthermore many working-class kids still succeed in the education
system and this would suggest that it is not home circumstances and
family background which dictates educational achievement.
/ourdieu and .asseron suggest that working-class students do not come
e,uipped to school with what they highlight as the right cultural capital
in contrast to middle-class students and the more powerful and dominant
classes in society today and thus are not fully prepared for educational
success. #hey suggest middle-class students are an eample of the
closest to the correct cultural capital and working class kids are furthest
away from having the correct cultural capital. #hey see middle-class
students as having the correct cultural capital as teachers are of the
same social class as them and so share the same level of cultural capital
and thus are more able to relate to middle-class pupils. +t is possible that
this stereotype is a part to play in working-class pupils underachievement
as teachers are not giving them the correct attention re,uired in order
to achieve academically.
Sullivan backs up /ourdieu and .asseron in their idea that middle-class
students have the correct cultural capital. She handed out 345
,uestionnaires in four different schools and asked ,uestions such as
what do you read$ what music do you listen to etc and found that it was
students who had parents with degrees were more successful in 6.7.S.Es
and thus pinpoints working-class families lack of cultural capital as of
factor of their educational underachievement.
Some sociologists highlight that working-class families have a high level
of material deprivation and thus are unable to afford learning materials
and resources for their children and they ultimately do poorly in formal
eaminations and all aspects of school. 0edge and .rosser state that
working-class children feel ecluded from the education system because
of economic deprivation. 1ack of ,uiet place to study$ healthy diet etc
contribute to absenteeism and results in them underachieving. Halsey also
points out that money becomes a barrier for working-class students from
continuing in education despite having similar intelligence to middle-class
children. +f this is the case then we are nearly inclined to feel that home
Declan %agennis &'(') Sociology Essay
circumstances and family background is a reason for working-class
underachievement.
+n consideration of the points outlined + feel that while cultural capital$
cultural deprivation and material deprivation have contributed to
educational underachievement they are not the only reasons why working-
class students are doing poorly in school. +nternal factors which
interactionists point out such as streaming$ labelling$ self-fulfilling
prophecy and deciding what constitutes as the ideal pupil have all
greatly hindered how working-class students perceive school and how
they act as a result. 0hile indeed students may witness domestic violence
or be a victim of child abuse within a working-class home or have lack of
money or material this may not necessarily be the case for all working-
class children. #hey may find the negative stereotypical nature of school
and the view the teacher places upon them as greatly affecting their
academic performance and thus they do poorly in school and are classified
as underachieving. + personally feel that such factors which occur
internally in schools are as much to blame for working-class
underachievement as home circumstances and family life. #hese internal
factors can have a profound affect on students and their educational
achievement rather their home situations.
Declan %agennis &'(') Sociology Essay