4.5 Theorists Flashcards
Social Class and Educational Attainment (36 cards)
Ramachandran
argues that in India, material deprivation is very serious:
* 50% of schools have a leaking roof or no water supply
* 35% have no blackboard or furniture
* 90% have no functioning toilets
She further argues that ‘Malnutrition, hunger and poor health remain core problems, which comprehensively affect attendance and performance in classes. The added burden of home chores and child labor influence a large number of children, especially girls, to drop out of school’.
Smith and Noble
Identifies barriers of learning:
* Families who cannot afford uniforms, trips, or equipment are more likely to be isolated and bullied - their learning suffers.
* Low income makes it less likely that a child has access to internet and resources outside of school.
* Marketisation: Better resourced schools are oversubscribed and are in wealthier areas.
* Older siblings may have part-time jobs or have to look after youngers.
Hirsch
identified that the wealthy are more likely to succeed because:
* More likely to have structured out-of-school activities.
* These activities meant they learned life skills and gained confidence.
* More space at home to complete school work.
* More likely to benefit from private ed.
Hirsch
Stated that material deprivation was a key factor to explain underachievement. The quality of the school only accounted for 14% of class differences in achievement.
Kynaston
The wealthy can afford private education.
Only 7% of pupils in Britain attend private schools - it’s not accessible (only 1 in 12 gets a means-tested bursary).
The Sutton Trust argued that private schooling gave major benefits to the pupils; Private-school students were 55x more likely to go to Oxbridge than those entitled to FSM and 22x more likely to get into a high-ranked uni.
However, Kynaston and Sutton Trust found that once the pupils make it to uni, state school pupils tend to do better. Kynaston concluded that private school pupils are over promoted.
Mike Britland
Argues that mc students get an advantage in state schools as they can afford tutors.
Douglas
Argued that material deprivation is too broad of an explanation for all forms of underachievement, because some materially deprived children, succeed.
Gazeley and Dunne
Suggest that schools can make a difference. Levels of working class achievement can be raised, but the behaviour and expectations of teachers can also increase (compound) the levels of material deprivation and cultural disadvantage that many wc children bring to school.
Douglas
Focuses on cultural deprivation as the main source of wc underachievement. He notes the impact of educational attainment of variables such as:
* parental attitudes, expressed in terms of levels of encouragement and interest in a child’s education.
* family size– larger wc familie smean fewer parental resources for each child.
* position within the family– older children tend to achieve more than younger members of large families.
* limited (deficient) care of babies in large families with fewer social and economic resources to devote to their care and upbringing.
Barry Sugarman
- WC don’t defer gratification - will take an immediate income rather than go to uni and get a higher income job.
- Fatalism: Don’t believe they can improve through hard work.
- Collectivism: Less likely to seek individual success in education.
Leon Fernstein
used data from the National Child Development Study and concluded that the most important factor in shaping educationnal achievement was the extent to which parents supported and encouraged their children.
Bernstein
Argued that wc restricted speech codes clashed with the elaborate speech codes of mc teachers. This influences teachers assessments: mc students, able to express themselves in the langauage of education, were consequently over-represented in top streams , sets and bands.
Goodman and Gregg
found that around 80% of the most affluent mothers assumed that their child would go to university, while around 40% of the least affluent mothers only hoped their child would go to university.
They also found that children from poorer families were ‘less academic’ and consequently less concerned about doing well academically compared to their mc peers.
Blackstone and Mortimore
Criticise the notion that wc parents are not invested in their children’s education;
* Parental interest hasn’t been measured adequately, since teacher assessments have been used, not giving the full picture.
* Further, wc parents may not visit school events as they are uncomfortable around the mc teachers - inferiority.
Gillian Evans
She carried some qualitative research by interviewing those on a London Council estate and found that most wc parents encouraged their children and placed high value on education.
She is a middle class parent and found that there was no difference in positive attitudes to education amongst mothers of different social classes.
Westergaard and Resler
Argued that while wc parents ‘have a high and increasing interest in children’s education they lack the means to translate into effective influence on their children’s behalf.’
Bernstein
He was one of the first to investigate how the use of language gave students certain cultural advantages and disadvantages. He argued that education was based on a particular language code that either needed to be learnt or used if students were to succeed in the terms set by modern education systems.
In this respect, Bernstein argued that there are two basic language codes; restricted and elaborated– that while not class specific are used in different situations and for different purposes.
Bernstein
Argued that restricted codes are used by all social classes. However, elaborated speech codes are more likely to be used by the middle classes and this is significant because education systems are based on the use of both restricted and elaborated speech codes.
Gaine and George
criticism of bernstein
they believe bernstein oversimplifies the difference between mc and wc speech patterns.
Class differences in speech patterns have declined and other factors affect educational achievement more than language codes.
Bernstein
Acknowledged that his research only showed differences between working and middle class language codes. This could be interpreted as cultural deprivation alternatively, could be explained by schools failing to develop a truly meritocratic system.
Hanafin and Lynch
Suggest that the idea of parental deficiency; in the form of wc (or minority ethnic) parents not valuing education, is not correct. They argue that many wc parents, both black and white, take a keen interest in their child’s education, but feel excluded from participation in decision making within schools.
Mirza
Cites the development of ‘Saturday Schools’ among Black Carribean Communities as evidence for for a commitment to education not being recognised within the state school system.
Mac an Ghaill
Argued that working class underachievement is not explained by the culture of working class boys but by changes in the labor market. for example, the decline in manufacturing jobs have effectively excluded wc boys from traditional forms of industrial employment and left them as a relatively marginalised group in the education system.
Padfield
Explores how ‘informal reputations’, such as being labelled a swot or a ‘naughty child’, gained within the school influenced official definitions of students.