Social Class Affect Childs Attainment Levels In

Education Education Essay

ukessays.com /essays/education/social-class-affect-childs-attainment-levels-in-educationeducation-essay.php
One obvious feature of the EDUCATION system in modern day Britain is the difference in
achievement between pupils of different social classes. Social class differences still continue to this
day despite major improvements in the EDUCATION system. In order to investigate childrens social
class status, we need to define what a social class is. The most basic class distinction is between the
powerful and the powerless. People in social classes with greater power attempt to cement their own
positions in society and maintain their ranking above the lower social classes in the social hierarchy.
Social hierarchy is a multi-layered pyramid-like social structure having a peak as the centralization of
power. Social classes with a great deal of power are usually viewed as elites, at least within their own
societies.
When examining social class differences in achievement, I am going to take on a sociological
perspective. The main comparison sociologists make is between working class and middle class pupils
by using parental occupation to determine a pupils social class. For example, middle class parents
traditionally take on careers including doctors, teachers, managerial roles and white collar
professions. Whereas working class parents tend to take on a more manual occupation, traditionally
they are skilled workers such as plumbers and mechanics or semi-skilled workers such as waitresses
and cleaners.
Social class background has profound domination on a childs opportunity of success in the
EDUCATION system. According to statistics taking from the Youth Cohort Study (2007), middle class
children on average perform better then working class children. This gap in attainment deepens as
children get older. Middle class children achieve higher at GSCE, stay longer in full time education and
take the mass of university places. It has largely been argued that wealthier parents can afford to send
their children to private schools, which may provide a better education consequently leading to higher
attainment levels.
Factors which cause differing attainment levels of children can be grouped into internal and external
factors. Internal factors are within schools. These are things such as interactions between teachers
and pupils and inequalities between schools. External factors come from outside education, things
such as the influence of home and the family background and lifestyle.
There are three external factors which affect education; cultural deprivation, material deprivation and
cultural capital. It is argued that we begin to acquire basic values and attitudes which are needed for
success in education through primary socialisation in the family. Cultural equipment includes
language, self discipline and reasoning skills. However according to some sociologists many working
class families fail to socialise their children consequently leaving them culturally deprived. This means
they under achieve in school as they do not have the cultural equipment for them to succeed. There
are three main aspects of cultural deprivation. Firstly, intellectual development. This refers to the
development of thinking, problem solving and reasoning skills. It is argued that many working class
homes lack things which stimulates a childs intellect i.e. books, toys and activities. A study carried out
by Douglas (1964) supports this. He found that working class pupils scored lower on tests of ability in
comparison with middle class pupils. His argument for this is that working class families are less likely
to support their childs intellectual development through EDUCATIONAL activities in the home
whereas middle class parents are more likely to choose toys and materials which encourage thinking
and reasoning skills. Thus, leaving middle class children more prepared for school.

Use of language plays an important role in EDUCATIONAL achievement. Lower class homes use
deficient language leaving children unable to develop the necessary language skills. This is argued by
sociologists Bereiter and Engelmann (1966). Children will grow up incapable of abstract thinking and
will be unable to explain, describe, enquire and compare due to this. Similarly, Basil Bernstein (1975)
also identifies difference in working class and middle class use of language. He categorizes between
two types of speech code; restricted and elaborated. The restricted code is used by the working class.
It has a limited vocabulary and is based on the use of short, unfinished, grammatically simple
sentences. The restricted code is context-bound meaning that the speaker assumes the listener
shares the same set of experiences. The elaborated code is used by the middle class. It contains a
wider vocabulary and includes longer, more complex sentences. This speech code is context-free as
the speaker does not assume that the listener shares the same experiences. These differences in
speech codes enables the middle class children an advantage as the elaborated code is spoke by
teachers, textbooks and exams.
Finally, a parents attitudes and values are a key factor affecting EDUCATIONAL attainment. When
a parent has negative or no views on education this reflects in the childs abilities as they receive no
encouragement FROM HOME . Douglas (1998) argues that working class families placed less value
on education. Also they are generally less ambitious for their children. Working class parents visit
schools less often, therefore are less likely to discuss their childs performance with teachers.
Consequently, the child is left with little motivation for higher achievement.
Unlike cultural deprivation theorists who see the inadequacy of working class homes responsible for
EDUCATIONAL failure, material deprivation theorists see poverty and lack of material necessities as
the cause of educational failure. Material deprivation refers to the lack of material necessities such as
adequate housing and income.
Statistics show that poverty is closely linked with under-achieving pupils; In 2006, only 32% of children
who received free school dinners gained 5 or more GCSE A*-C passes compared to 61% of pupils not
receiving free school meals. Therefore the chance of children eligible for free school meals getting
good qualifications by the age of 16 is still less than a third that of their better-off classmates. Poor
housing conditions can also affect pupils achievement, overcrowding in the home can make it difficult
for a child to study, families living in temporary accommodation can disrupt a childs education when
moving around a lot and poor housing could affect a childs health which would then lead to a decrease
in attendance. Marilyn Howard (2001) argues that young people from poorer homes have a more
unhealthy DIET ; this leads to lack of vitamins and minerals which will affect the childs performance
at school.
Bourdieu (1984) argues that it is a mixture of both cultural and material factors which link to
educational achievement. To explain why middle class are more successful, Bourdieu uses the concept
of capital. Cultural capital refers to the knowledge, attitudes and values of the middle class, he sees
middle class culture as capital as it gives an advantage to those who pass it, just like its wealth. He
argues that through middle class childrens socialisation, they pick up the language, self discipline and
reasoning skills, which the education system requires, to be successful in their academic life. Gewirtz
(1995) investigated how cultural capital can lead to differences in educational achievement. Through
her study, Gewirtz found that differences in cultural capital lead to class differences in what extent a
parent has of choosing a secondary school.
As external factors play an important role in creating social class inequalities in the education system,
we also need to consider the role that internal factors play. These internal factors, which come from
inside the school, include labelling, the self-fulfilling prophecy and pupil subcultures.
To label a person means to attach a definition to them i.e. in schools, a child being labelled bright or
think, troublemaker or hardworking. In schools, children are labelled heavily when they are divided into
ability based groups. However studies show that a teacher will place a label upon a child on the basis
of stereotypical assumptions about their background and assumed attitudes. Working class children

tend to be labelled negatively, whereas middle class pupils tend to be labelled positively. A study
carried out by Howard Becker (1971) investigated labelling. Interviews with 60 high secondary school
teachers showed Becker that teachers judged pupils according to how closely they fitted with the image
of an idealistic perfect pupil. Teachers judged pupils by their individual work, appearance and
character. This study showed that children from middle class backgrounds fit the image of a perfect
pupil more so than a working class child. This is evidence that labelling of working class pupils puts
them at a disadvantage due to their stereotypical negative labels.
A self-fulfilling prophecy is a predication that comes true simply by virtue of it having been made.
Labelling affects a childs achievement in school by creating a self-fulfilling prophecy. When a teacher
labels a pupil, they make predictions about their abilities for example, this child will excel. The child
then gets treat according to this prediction i.e. by giving more attention or expecting a higher or lower
level of work. Next the pupil internalises the teachers expectations which becomes part of its selfimage. This makes the child become the kind of pupil the teacher perceived them to be. For example, if
a child is labelled positively, the child will then gain more confidence and try harder with their work, thus
leading them to success.
An investigation made by Robert Rosenthal and Leonora Jacobson (1968) showed the self fulfilling
prophecy at work. Rosenthal and Jacobson told the school that they had designed a new test which
identified children which would spurt in their academic life. However the test was not a newly
designed test, it was a simple IQ test. The researchers tested all the pupils, but went on to randomly
pick out 20%. Again, falsely they told the school that pupils in this 20% were spurters. On returning to
the school at a later date, Rosenthal and Jacobson found that almost half of those labelled as spurters
had made significant progress. This study suggests that the teachers beliefs about pupils had been
significantly influenced by the fake test. The teachers had labelled the pupils as spurters treat the
pupils accordingly to their label and the pupils then took on the teachers expectation and excelled.
Therefore fulfilling, the self fulfilling prophecy.
Finally pupil subcultures is pupils who emerge themselves as a result of labelling, these grouped pupils
often share similar values and behaviour patterns. A study made by Colin Lacey (1970) shows how
pupil subcultures play a part in creating class differences in achievement; Lacey shows this through the
concepts of differentiation and polarisation. Differentiation is the process of how teachers categorise
students according to their levels of ability, attitude and behaviour. Polarisation refers to the process in
which pupils react to streaming and labelling processes by moving from either an extremely positive
pole to an extremely negative pole. Pupils who are placed in higher streams tend to have a consistent
positive attitude towards education, hence keeping to the positive pole. Thus, forming a pro-school
subculture. Pupils placed in lower streams have a less positive attitude towards education as they
suffer a loss of confidence and self-esteem. This label of failure pushes these pupils to a negative pole.
Thus, forming an anti-school subculture.
Since the education reform act (1988), unfortunately there has been greater trend towards streaming
and towards a variety of types of schools, some being more academic than others. This diversity has
created new opportunities for schools and teachers to differentiate between pupils based on class
differences. However not only is this discrimination restricted to class differences since the 1988 reform
act, it has since branched off into ethnicity and gender differences.
Gender has been targeted to have a major impact on a childs experience during education. In recent
years there has been a vast difference in gender achievement; girls have largely overtaken boys. Data
taken from the national literacy trust website shows that in 1975, girls on average were achieving 2%
higher than boys. This statistic remained relatively static until 1988 to 1989. In that year GCSEs were
introduced, grade inflation began and coursework increased. This was followed by a sudden increase
to around 10%; the size of the gap ever since has remained stationary. This shows that from first
starting their school life, girls consistently achieve higher than boys.
However one area that has been slower to change is a childs subject choice. Boys and girls are still

opting to study traditional sex-typed subjects and courses. There are three main questions that arise
about gender differences in education; why do girls achieve higher than boys? why do girls and boys
opt for these sex-typed subjects? And how does schooling reinforce gender identities?
These gender differences can be put down to external factors i.e. factors outside the education system,
and internal factors i.e. factors within the education system. Factors outside a childs school life heavily
impact their educational attainment as we have explored earlier on. One major factor which can be
argued has a huge influence on girls attitudes and high achievement levels is the impact of feminism.
Since the 1960s the feminist movement had challenged the stereotypical female role as a subordinate
to males. Although feminists argue that full equality is yet to be attained, they have gained extensive
success in improving womens rights and opportunities. However most importantly, the feminist
movement has raised womens self-esteems and expectations. These changes have changed the old
traditional stereotype and have influenced many girls to have higher ambitions in life. Thus, influencing
girls to exert themselves vigorously in their education life.
Similarly, changes in family structure and changes in womens employment have also lead women to
question their role as females and think deeper about what they want out of life. For example a lone
parent household, can affect a girls attitude as they see their mother taking on the role of homemaker
as well as a breadwinner, independently providing for the family as well as taking on housework and
emotionally work to support her children. This sets an example to a young girl. She will perceive her
mother as a role model and will want to be like her. She will want to be independent and hard working
when she grows up. Also changes in womens employment encourage girls to be more independent
and hardworking. The 1970 Equal Pay Act made it illegal to pay womens less than men for work of
equal value, and the 1975 Sex Discrimination Act outlaws sex discrimination in the work place. Over
70% of women now work enabling girls to see their future in paid work rather than housework.
Factors inside school also play an important role in explaining the gender differences in achievement.
Equal opportunities policies enforce gender equality in schools consequently leaving girls to have the
same opportunities as boys, enabling them to progress more. Policies such as GIST (girls into science
and technology), which was launched in the 1980s, were introduced to encourage girls into perusing
non traditional careers. Similarly, the introduction of the National Curriculum in 1988 partially removed
gender inequality by making boys and girls study the same subjects. Also, female school teachers are
an influence to young girls. Girls see female teachers as something to aspire towards therefore
cancelling out traditional life goals.
Coursework in schools also give girls an advantage. It is a common fact that girls take more care with
their work and are better at meeting deadlines therefore they will do better in coursework compared to
boys. Statistics show that the peak of the attainment gap between girls and boys happened in the late
1980s. This is when GCSEs and coursework was introduced in schools. Also, selection and league
tables aid girls. Since girls academically achieve better in school, marketisation policies have
constructed girls into desirable recruits. This enables girls to be attracted to more prestigious schools,
producing a self-fulfilling prophecy, meaning they will consequently achieve better.
Whilst exploring the increasing achievement in girls, it is necessary to assess boys performance. It can
be arguable that this differentiation in educational attainment is not due to the exertion on girls, but due
to the failure of boys. Once again, factors which cause this can be grouped into external and internal.
External being boys having poorer literacy skills and the decline of traditional male jobs, and internal
being the feminine aspect of education, the shortage of male primary school teachers ad laddish
subcultures.
Boys spend a lot of free time playing on games consoles and football etc, thus doing little to develop
their language and communication skills. This results in their lack of literacy skills. In contrast with this,
girls tend to have a bedroom culture which involves staying in with friends and talking amongst each
other. The decline of traditional male jobs, such as heavy industrial jobs i.e. iron, steel, shipbuilding and
mining careers, gives the impression to boys that there is little prospect for getting a real job. This

affects their motivation to gain good qualifications, affects their attainment levels, and then finally
affects their self-esteem as their see themselves as failures.
Internal factors which affect boys achievement in school could be put down to the shortage of male
primary school teachers. This decreasing lack of strong role models results in boys insufficient effort in
their school life. Also laddish subcultures can contribute to boys under-achievement. A study
conducted by Debbie Epstein (1998) on group of working class boys showed that they are likely to be
mocked for appearing to be swots in school. This causes boys to underachieve as they will not be
working to their full potential in fear of being harassed.
Apart from there being a gap in gender achievement levels, there is also a gap in subject choice and
gender identity. Despite the improvement of girls achievements compared to boys, there still tends to
be diversity in subject choice. Girls go for traditional girl subjects, for example textiles and languages,
and boys going for traditional boy subjects, for example maths a physics. Schooling also reinforces
gender identity through the curriculum and interaction between pupils and teachers.
Segregated gender subject choices are highly noticeable after a child leaves school as a student has
greater freedom for choice. Statistics show that in A level choices, boyish subject like computing have
a class which consists of 90% males, whereas subjects like English that are seen as girlish have 69%
females in classes. Explanations for these gendered choices could be put down to peer pressure, early
socialisation and gendered subject images. If a student wishes to do a subject that falls outside of their
gender domain, then they will usually avoid it as it will attract negative responses from peers. Early
socialisation also has an effect as children learn which behaviour is expected of males and females in
society and include this in their decision on subject choices. Finally gendered subject images have an
effect on subject choice. Some subjects naturally give off a masculine or a feminine affect, for example
computer subjects as it involves working with machines which is generally a male domain.