GCSE attainment in UK data
It is well known that children growing up in poorer families leave school with lower levels of educational attainment. "Parents' social class retains a large and significant direct effect on GCSE attainment" (Sullivan, 2001, p19). In 2008, less than a quarter of children from the poorest families (eligible for free school meals) obtained fiver or more good GCSEs (at A*-C) with just over half of their richers peers obtaining the same grades. Such achievement gaps are a major factor in explaining patterns of social mobility and poverty. Statistics have highlighted that British children’s educational attainment is overwhelmingly linked to parental occupation, income, and qualifications (Lupton et al, 2009; National Equality Panel, 2010; Sodha and Margo, 2010). In 2011 The Department for Education released GCSE pass rates broken down into ethnicity, free school meals and special educational needs. This data provides us with an idea of what factors seem to be playing a role in educational underachievement. Eligibility for free school meals is used as a key measure of poverty, to qualify a family must earn less than £16,000 a year. 34.6 per cent of pupils receiving these free school meals obtained five or more A*-C grades at GCSE, compared to 78.5 per cent of Chinese pupils obtaining five A*-C grades. For that year, there was an overall pass rate of 58.2 per cent at grades A*-C. This shows that with less than half gaining 5 or more GCSE’s at a pass grade, the children whose families are earning less than £16,000 a year are generally underachieving.
Why working class children underachieve
There is lots of research into the effects of working class sub-culture on educational achievement. Theories tend to be based on cultural deprivation or cultural difference. Writers such as Hyman and Douglas focus on working class students being disadvantaged by their own culture. Whereas writers such as Bernstein believes that importance of class differences in language puts working class students at a disadvantage.
Cultural deprivation theory suggests that the culture of working people is not as good as that of middle class people which leads to educational failure among working class children. This is a popular theory amongst sociologists and one view is that working class parents are not as good at parenting. This view focuses on traits and values transmitted by parents.
In March 2010, The Joseph Rowntree Foundation provided a very interesting report into the inequalities in educational achievement which provides data on attainment at different ages relative to family wealth. The study uses data from four longitudinal studies to attempt to uncover the main factors behind why children from poorer backgrounds do so badly in education.
The report found that by the time young people take their GCSE’s, the gap between rich and poor is very large. By measuring the socio-economic position of the parents, they found that only 21 per cent of the poorest fifth managed to gain five GCSE’s (grades A*-C) compared with 75 per cent of the richest. It highlights that the attitudes and behaviours of teenagers and those of their parents contribute to the attainment gap in GCSE results. Finding that young people are more likely to do well at their GCSEs if they have a greater belief in their own ability at school. This relates to the theory of self-fulfilling prophecy which suggests that if you believe you aren’t going to succeed then you are unlikely to succeed.
Hyman believes that working class students have less ambition than middle class, and feel like upward social mobility will take them away from their working-class roots. This links back to the idea that working class children have less ambition, partially because they don't want to progress and partially because their parents don't see them being successful. Douglas agrees with this view and thinks that middle class parents take more interest in their child's education than working class parents, which suggests a difference in culture. Critics have however condemned Hyman's work due to his reliance on questionnaire data which lacks validity as attitudes may have been exaggerated or not representative.
As well as this the report also suggests that it is important for a parent to think that their child will go onto higher education. For the poorest fifth in society, 46 per cent have mothers with no qualifications at all whereas for the richest it's only 3%. And parents remain a powerful predictor of what class you're in and the class you're capable of moving to. It is obviously far less common for a mother from a poorer background to have attended higher education, firstly because if she had a degree then its likely she would be earning more money and secondly because it wasn’t as common for children from disadvantage backgrounds to go on to higher education. This in turn will mean they might not expect their child to attend university.
Focusing on working class differences, Bourdieu believed that cultural capital was the key to working class underachievement, seeing it as the possession of a dominant culture guaranteeing access to high paid occupations. The middle class culture also provides more opportunities with parents affording to buy houses in catchment area, as well as private education and using social contacts to gain work experience placements which will advance future career opportunities "cultural capital is one mechanism through which higher-class families ensure educational advantage for their children" (Sullivan, 2001, p19). Cultural values reflect the values of our education system. Teachers view children from middle class homes more positively.
This idea of cultural, social and economic capital however, is quite vague. The wealth and social contact are perhaps only really applicable to success in art based subjects. “In sum, Bourdieu's view is that cultural capital is inculcated in the higher-class home, and enables the higher-class student to gain higher educational credentials than the lower-class student. This enables higher-class individuals to maintain their class positions, and legitimates the dominant positions that they typically go on to hold. ” (Sullivan, 2001, p894).
For Bourdieu the education system is not meritocratic. Its major function is to maintain and legitimate a class-divided society. In his view
schools are middle-class institutions run by and for the middle class. He put forward the idea of symbolic violence, the undermining of working class choices, knowledge, accent and confidence with things such as middle class defining the curriculum. Similarly to Marx, Bourdieu believed that schools’ formal curriculum and the hidden curriculum were deliberately geared to failing most working-class children, and to elevating middle class children. This would suggest that society is flawed, and that education is just a reflection of our society.
Cultural deprivation theory suggests that the culture of working people is not as good as that of middle class people which leads to educational failure among working class children. This is a popular theory amongst sociologists and one view is that working class parents are not as good at parenting. This view focuses on traits and values transmitted by parents.
In March 2010, The Joseph Rowntree Foundation provided a very interesting report into the inequalities in educational achievement which provides data on attainment at different ages relative to family wealth. The study uses data from four longitudinal studies to attempt to uncover the main factors behind why children from poorer backgrounds do so badly in education.
The report found that by the time young people take their GCSE’s, the gap between rich and poor is very large. By measuring the socio-economic position of the parents, they found that only 21 per cent of the poorest fifth managed to gain five GCSE’s (grades A*-C) compared with 75 per cent of the richest. It highlights that the attitudes and behaviours of teenagers and those of their parents contribute to the attainment gap in GCSE results. Finding that young people are more likely to do well at their GCSEs if they have a greater belief in their own ability at school. This relates to the theory of self-fulfilling prophecy which suggests that if you believe you aren’t going to succeed then you are unlikely to succeed.
Hyman believes that working class students have less ambition than middle class, and feel like upward social mobility will take them away from their working-class roots. This links back to the idea that working class children have less ambition, partially because they don't want to progress and partially because their parents don't see them being successful. Douglas agrees with this view and thinks that middle class parents take more interest in their child's education than working class parents, which suggests a difference in culture. Critics have however condemned Hyman's work due to his reliance on questionnaire data which lacks validity as attitudes may have been exaggerated or not representative.
As well as this the report also suggests that it is important for a parent to think that their child will go onto higher education. For the poorest fifth in society, 46 per cent have mothers with no qualifications at all whereas for the richest it's only 3%. And parents remain a powerful predictor of what class you're in and the class you're capable of moving to. It is obviously far less common for a mother from a poorer background to have attended higher education, firstly because if she had a degree then its likely she would be earning more money and secondly because it wasn’t as common for children from disadvantage backgrounds to go on to higher education. This in turn will mean they might not expect their child to attend university.
Focusing on working class differences, Bourdieu believed that cultural capital was the key to working class underachievement, seeing it as the possession of a dominant culture guaranteeing access to high paid occupations. The middle class culture also provides more opportunities with parents affording to buy houses in catchment area, as well as private education and using social contacts to gain work experience placements which will advance future career opportunities "cultural capital is one mechanism through which higher-class families ensure educational advantage for their children" (Sullivan, 2001, p19). Cultural values reflect the values of our education system. Teachers view children from middle class homes more positively.
This idea of cultural, social and economic capital however, is quite vague. The wealth and social contact are perhaps only really applicable to success in art based subjects. “In sum, Bourdieu's view is that cultural capital is inculcated in the higher-class home, and enables the higher-class student to gain higher educational credentials than the lower-class student. This enables higher-class individuals to maintain their class positions, and legitimates the dominant positions that they typically go on to hold. ” (Sullivan, 2001, p894).
For Bourdieu the education system is not meritocratic. Its major function is to maintain and legitimate a class-divided society. In his view
schools are middle-class institutions run by and for the middle class. He put forward the idea of symbolic violence, the undermining of working class choices, knowledge, accent and confidence with things such as middle class defining the curriculum. Similarly to Marx, Bourdieu believed that schools’ formal curriculum and the hidden curriculum were deliberately geared to failing most working-class children, and to elevating middle class children. This would suggest that society is flawed, and that education is just a reflection of our society.
The report also suggested that young people are more likely to do well at GCSE if their parents “devote material resources towards education including private tuition, computer and internet access” This highlights the impact that coming from a working class family can have on the education of a child. (Chowdry et al 2010). Material deprivation theory focuses on the effects of a low income on a home. Some people cannot afford things they need to gain success for children.
The link between social class background and educational outcome is strengthened by these theories that link to lack of opportunity due to wealth, social contacts and a different culture. Using Cultural Deprivation purely as an explanation controversial, it suggests that working class attitudes need to change (Keddie, 1976)
The link between social class background and educational outcome is strengthened by these theories that link to lack of opportunity due to wealth, social contacts and a different culture. Using Cultural Deprivation purely as an explanation controversial, it suggests that working class attitudes need to change (Keddie, 1976)