Educational Achievement | Sociology for A Level - Year 13 PDF Download

Social Class: Internal Factors

Social Class Differences in Educational Achievement

Educational outcomes vary across different groups, with sociologists identifying social class, gender, and ethnicity as key factors contributing to these disparities. These differences can be categorized into external factors (outside the school environment) and internal factors (within the school).

External Influences

External factors include:

• Material factors: Poverty, home conditions, and the school’s catchment area.
• Cultural factors: Parental education levels, attitudes toward education, language use, and lack of cultural capital.

Internal Influences
Internal factors include:

• Teacher evaluations.
• Stereotyping.
• Streaming and labelling.
• The self-fulfilling prophecy.
• Subcultures.

Differences in Achievement: Social Class (Internal Factors)

Differences in educational achievement based on social class can be divided into external (outside school) and internal (within school) factors.

Becker and Keddie (1971)

• Keddie applied Becker’s concept of labelling to examine streaming in schools. 
• She observed that teachers often labelled middle-class students as ‘ideal pupils,’ leading to more favorable treatment compared to working-class students.

Impacts of Labelling

• Positive labelling of middle-class students often resulted in their placement in higher streams, where teachers held higher expectations. 
• In contrast, working-class students in lower streams faced negative treatment and were often denied access to higher-level knowledge.

Ball (1981)

• Ball’s research revealed a strong link between students’ school banding and their parents’ occupational backgrounds. 
• Students with parents in middle-class jobs were more likely to be placed in higher bands, while those with parents in working-class jobs were typically placed in lower bands. 

Link to teachers

• Ball attributed this to teachers’ positive and negative labelling, which led to higher expectations for higher-band students, creating a self-fulfilling prophecy and contributing to varied educational outcomes.

Woods (1983)
Woods outlined various ways students adapt to their school environment. Positive adaptations include:

• Ingratiation: Some students fully embrace the school’s academic goals, seeking to gain teachers’ favor.
• Compliance: A less intense adaptation involving a degree of conformity to school expectations.

Woods: 'Rebellion'

• Woods also identified negative adaptations, such as ‘rebellion,’ where students reject the school’s goals and methods, fostering an anti-school culture. 
• He noted that working-class students were more likely to adopt negative, non-conformist adaptations, while middle-class students tended to exhibit positive, conformist behaviors.

Social Class: External Factors

Differences in Achievement: Social Class (External Factors)

Joseph Rowntree Foundation (1997)
The Joseph Rowntree Foundation (1997) underscores the significant impact of poverty and low income on children’s educational outcomes.

JRF Data: Deprivation & Achievement

• The JRF data indicates a clear connection between material deprivation and reduced educational achievement. 
• Children from low-income families were found to have less access to resources such as computers, internet, and private tuition compared to their middle-class peers. 
• The JRF concluded that child poverty poses a major obstacle to educational success, perpetuating class-based inequalities in the UK.

Halsey (1980)

• Halsey (1980) asserts that the education system does not provide equal opportunities for all children. 
• His findings show that working-class children are more likely to underachieve, while middle-class children tend to succeed. 
• Specifically, middle-class students are more likely to continue in post-compulsory education at ages 16 and 18.

Halsey’s Conclusions About Inequality

• While Halsey recognized cultural factors as barriers to educational success, he emphasized the critical role of material factors. 
• He argued that insufficient economic resources were the primary determinant of whether a child would pursue post-compulsory education. 
• To address class disparities in education, Halsey proposed financial support, such as grants, to encourage students from low-income families to remain in school or college.

Differences in Achievement: Social Class (Douglas (1964))

Poor Housing & Achievement

• Douglas (1964) identified a strong correlation between poor housing conditions, such as overcrowding, and lower educational attainment. 
• His research showed that children of manual workers, who often lived in substandard housing, performed worse on school tests assessing mental ability. 
• In contrast, children of non-manual workers or those from middle-class backgrounds, who typically lived in better housing, performed better on these tests at ages 8 and 11.

Importance of Parental Interest

• Douglas (1964) emphasized that parental interest was the most significant factor influencing a child’s educational success. 
• While other factors like family size, health, and school quality played a role, the level of parental support was paramount.

Middle-Class Parental Support

• Douglas argued that middle-class parents were more likely to support their children’s education by assisting with schoolwork, regularly visiting schools to monitor progress, and encouraging continuation in post-compulsory education. 
• He also highlighted the importance of primary socialization, noting that middle-class families were more likely to provide early and consistent support to their children compared to working-class families.

Social Class: Attitudes to Education

Sugarman (1970): Subcultures

• Sugarman (1970) proposed that differences in educational achievement between middle-class and working-class children stem from the distinct subcultures they are socialized into. 
• He argued that the norms, values, and attitudes transmitted by middle-class parents, tied to their non-manual occupations, differ significantly from those of working-class parents, who are typically engaged in manual work.

Sugarman (1970): Parents' Attitude

• Sugarman suggested that working-class parents tend to exhibit fatalistic attitudes, prioritize immediate gratification, focus on the present, and emphasize collectivism. 
• In contrast, middle-class parents are more optimistic, value deferred gratification, adopt a future-oriented perspective, and promote individualism.

Sugarman's Conclusions

• Sugarman concluded that these differing attitudes and orientations, passed down to children, contribute to the educational disadvantages faced by working-class children. 
• He argued that working-class parents place less value on education compared to their middle-class counterparts, leading to disparities in educational outcomes.

Leon Feinstein's (2003) Sources

• Leon Feinstein (2003) drew on data from the British Cohort Study and the National Child Development Study to demonstrate a connection between social class and educational achievement.

Feinstein's (2003) Findings

• Feinstein found that lower educational achievement among working-class children is influenced by factors such as parents’ education levels, the quality of schools attended, and material deprivation. 
• However, he emphasized that parental interest and support are the most critical factors in determining a child’s educational success. 
• His findings align with Douglas (1964), highlighting that middle-class parents provide greater support and show more interest in their children’s educational development.

Hyman (1967)

• Hyman (1967) argued that differences in educational achievement between social classes are rooted in their distinct value systems. 
• He suggested that working-class individuals place less value on education compared to the middle class and are less likely to aspire to high-status professional jobs, thus limiting their opportunities.

Hyman: Working-Class Values

• Hyman noted that working-class families often prioritize manual work or “getting a trade,” viewing these as stable and secure options that involve less risk than non-manual, professional careers. 
• He argued that these values, held by working-class parents, restrict the educational achievement of their children.

Social Class: Difference in Achievement

Studies on Difference in Achievement: Bourdieu

Bourdieu (1971, 1974) contends that cultural inferiority does not explain the lower educational performance of working-class students.

Role: Cultural Reproduction

• Drawing on a Marxist perspective, Bourdieu situates educational inequalities within a capitalist framework. 
• He argues that the education system’s primary function is cultural reproduction, perpetuating the culture of the dominant capitalist class. 
• According to Bourdieu, the system favors middle-class students because their norms and values align closely with those of the ruling class.

Cultural Capital

• Bourdieu introduces the concept of ‘cultural capital,’ which refers to the cultural knowledge and experiences that give upper- and middle-class children an advantage. 
• Examples include familiarity with specific language norms and engagement in cultural activities like museum visits or reading literature.
• Middle-class children are more likely to be exposed to these elements of high culture, while working-class children often lack access to such practices and knowledge, placing them at a disadvantage in education.

Designed to Maintain Inequalities

• Bourdieu asserts that the education system is structured to preserve class inequalities rather than promote equal opportunities for all students.

Gender