Sociologists

• Hubbs-Tait et al : when parents used language that challenged their children’s evaluation —> cognitive performance improved
• Leon Fienstien :

  • educated parents more likely to use language that challenged their children’s evaluations
  • educated parents more likely to use praise —> encourage children to develop a sense of own competence
• Bernstein : working class families have restricted codes, middle class families have elaborated codes
• Bereiter & Engelmann : language used in w/c = deficient. communicate by gestures / single words / disjointed phrases. —> children fail to develop necessary language skills, therefore likely to fail
• Bernstein :

  • w/c : Restrictive code - limited vocab, short unfinished grammatically simple sentence, context bound
  • m/c : Elaborated code - wider vocab, longer grammatically more complex sentences
• EVALUATION : Bernstein is a cultural deprivation theorist. However, he recognises that school (not just the home) influences children’s achievement
• Douglas : w/c parents place less value on education —> less ambitious for their children —> children had lower levels of motivation & achievement
• Feinstein : parents own education is the most important factor affecting their children's educational achievement. m/c parents more educated —> children socialised different to their advantage

  • Parenting Style - expectations and support
  • Parents Educational Behaviours - parents know what is needed for educational progress (reading, helping with hw)
  • Income - spend income on educational toys / nutritions important for development
• Bernstein & Young : m/c mothers more likely to buy educational toys / books / skill activities —> stimulate intellectual development
• Sugarman : 4 features of w/c subculture that acts as an educational barrier

  • Fatalism - cant change fate of failure
  • Collectivism - group work
  • Immediate Gratification - seeking pleasure now
  • Present Time Orientation - present more important, no long term goals
• Keddie : cultural deprivation is a myth, victim blaming. children cannot be deprived on their own culture, w/c children are culturally different. Schools are bias in favour of white culture
• Barry, Troyna & Williams : problem is not children’s language, but the school’s attitude towards it. speech hierarchy

  m/c > w/c > black
• Blackstone & Mortimore : WC parents attend fewer parents evening as they work longer hours not due to lack of interest
• Flaherty : money problems in the family are a significant factor in school attendance
• Wilkinson : among 10 YOs, the lower the social class = the higher rates of hyperactivity / anxiety / conduct disorders

  —> negative effect on children’s education
• Blanden and Machin : children from low income families were more likely to engage in externalising behaviour (fighting)

  —> disrupt schooling
• Bull : the cost of free schooling, w/c children have to do without equipment and experiences that would enhance achievement
• Tanner et al : cost of items (transport, books, uniform) place a heavy burden on poor families
• Smith & Noble : poverty acts as a barrier to learning in other ways (private schooling/tuition)
• Ridge : children in poverty take jobs (babysitting/cleaning) that often have a negative impact on schoolwork
• Durkheim :

  • education creates social solidarity by transmitting shared beliefs/values
  • education teaches specialist skills needed for work due to the complex divisions of labour
• Wolf : high quality apprenticeships = rare and don’t often end in high paid jobs —> education doesn’t teach specialist skills
• Tumin : Davis and Moore’s argument = circular. A job is important because is it highly rewarded (vice versa)
• Wrong : functionallist view is ‘over socialised‘ - assumes pupils don’t reject values
• Parsons :

  • education bridges the gap between family and wider society
  • have to learn societies principles - particularistic (rules of family) and universal standards (everyone)
  • meritocracy within school helps people move from family to society
• Chubb and Moe : consumer choice

  • “voucher system“ —> parents shop for a school to give their voucher to
  • forces schools to listen to parents —> raise education standards
  • schools compete to attract “customers”
  • Parentocracy : influenced by parents
• Ball : competition between schools only benefit the MC (they can access better schools using their cultural/economic capital
• Bowles and Gintis :

  • correspondence principal - education mirrors the workplace
  • study of 237 students —> school rewards traits that make up a submissive worker + creative students = lower grades
  • hidden curriculum - prepares WC pupils for the role of exploited worker (being on time/uniform) —> reproduces capitalism
• Morrow and Torres : society is more diverse, marxism take on a class first approach
• MacDonald : marxism ignores that education reproduces patriarchy
• Willis : study on ”The Lads”

  • WC pupils can resist being indoctrinated (B&G ignore)
  • their culture opposes the school unlike the “ear’oles”
  • go against the school rules and values —> they reject the idea that WC can get MC through meritocracy
• Althusser : these keep the bourgeoisie in power

  • RSA - police ect maintain power by force / threats
  • ISA - religion, education control people’s ideas / beliefs
• Althusser : education is an important ISA that performs 2 functions

  • reproduces class inequality - failing each WC gen
  • legitimising class inequality - making sets of beliefs that hide the actual cause of inequality. persuades workers that it is inevitable —> less likely to challenge capitalism
• Marx :

  • education revolves around class divisions and capitalist exploitation.
  • workers will realise the exploitation —> overthrow capitalism = classless society
  • education controlled by the state —> reproduces class inequality + prevents WC revolution
• Heaton and Lawson : patriarchy is reinforced by the hidden curriculum
• Becker : interviewed 60 Chicago HS teachers --> teachers attached labels to students on how close they match the "ideal pupil" factors = appearance and relationships within school
• Dunne & Gazeley : schools reproduce WC underachievement due to labels - interviews from 9 schools --> found teachers normalised WC underachievement - teachers labeled WC parents = uninterested vs MC = supportive
• Hempel-Jorgensen : "ideal pupil depends on class of school" e.g. WC primary school = quiet & obedient vs MC school = personality & academic ability
• Rist : study found teachers use info about pupils home background to sort them into groups - Tigers (MC) = fast learners / received most attention vs Cardinals (WC) = given lower level books / received less attention/help + seated further away from the teacher
• Rosenthal & Jacobson : Study on SFP

  • faked an IQ test for students
  • randomly labelled and told teachers the "spurters"
  • a year later --> the randomly picked group = improved academically