Getting a just education is considered as a basic right of all children, yet the inequality and bias that occurs due to social class groupings acts as a substantial barrier. According to the Marxist perspective on society, there are two main classes: the bourgeoisie upper class and the proletariat working class. The working class is continually exploited by the bourgeoisie and is at a major disadvantage. The effect that social class has on educational attainment can be categorized into external and internal factors that affect pupil success. Internal factors are those that occur within the classroom and external factors consist of the environment at home and outside school.
One of the external factors that affect educational attainment is material deprivation. It refers to the inability to provide basic resources needed for comfortable living such as heating and spacious housing as well as resources needed for educational success. Children who have been brought up in indigence are prone to having low levels of educational attainment. According to Smith and Noble (1995), low-income families from the working class are often unable to afford books and computers with Internet access, generally resulting in the child failing to keep up with studies at school. Children from working class families may also have health issues due to a poor diet and cramped living conditions, leading to days of education being missed (Marilyn Howard, 2001). On the other hand, middle class parents have the economic capital to place their children into high performance schools and purchase extra resources that aid in higher educational attainment.
However, not all children from low-income families that are eligible for free school meals have low educational attainments and this is supported by a research report by Babb et al. (2004). An average of 55% White British boys and girls achieved 5 or more A*-C grades in GCSE whereas only about 25% of FSM boys and girls achieved these grades. However, Chinese boys and girls remained at a mean of about 80% regardless of being on FSM or not. This implies that material deprivation can be over come and is not the sole reason for low levels of educational success; other cultural factors and various internal factors such as teacher expectations and labeling in school and can be of more influence.
Teachers in school have certain expectations of students and a concept of an ‘ideal pupil’. Middle class students possess more traits that enable them to be closely linked to the ideal, whereas working class pupils seem to move further away from it (Becker, 1971). As claimed by Hargeaves, and Hester and Mellor (1975) this results in teachers attaching mental labels to students based on factors such as speech, appearance, manners, attitudes and where they reside. As a result of misconduct of working class pupils in the classroom, teachers regard them as less likely to intellectually bloom and attach negative labels to them. These labels cause students to act in a certain manner that allows them to live up to the label and fulfill the predictions previously drawn up about them. This is referred to as the self-fulfilling prophecy and can often result in a Pygmalion effect in the classroom.
A study conducted by Rosenthal and Jacobson (1968) investigated this effect by selecting certain pupils and labeling them as high achievers in front of their teachers. The rest of the group was claimed to not have the same academic capabilities although there was no actual difference between the two student groups. By the end of the year, the quick learners made notable progress as the teachers worked closely with them and gave them more attention. This exhibits the power of teachers in educational success. They did not favor teaching the working class as they already assumed that those pupils could not reach the same level of educational success as the middle class. These students were assigned seats further from the teachers and given less attention (Rist, 1970). Working class pupils may not bring the same culture and skills into the classroom but teachers should learn how to work with these pupils and build up their culture instead of labeling them negatively and watching the Pygmalion effect fall into place.
Children acquire basic principles, skills and attitudes from their parents through the process of primary socialization. Working class parents often fail in socializing their children properly, leading them to begin school culturally deprived which can hamper their success. There are three facets of cultural deprivation: language, attitude and values, and intellectual development. Bernstein (1975) identified two codes that exist in language spoken by middle class and the working class: elaborated and restricted. Restricted code is mainly spoken by the lower class, involving limited English lexis and elementary sentence structures, which makes it harder for them to communicate their ideas and benefit from the opportunities the school offers (Bereiter and Engelmann, 1966). The middle class use elaborated code containing more descriptive and complex language that is favored by and used in the educational system, therefore giving them an advantage.
Moreover, Douglas (1964) argues that working class parents do not emphasize the value of education and are less aspiring and supportive towards their child’s education. This lack of concern for their child’s education can engender underachievement at school and override financial struggles (Feinstein, 1998). However, working class parents may have interest in their child’s education but not have time to focus on it by cause of long working hours (Blackstone and Mortimore, 1994). The educational system does not favor the values that the working class instills and the children then become deprived of the cultural capital that is needed to equip them for success.
Cultural capital is a non-financial asset that contributes to educational attainment. Certain abilities, skills and interests of the middle class are valued by schools and are part of the dominant culture in society. According to Bourdieu (1984), possessing more of the dominant culture is equivalent to having higher qualifications that lead to further success. Alice Sullivan (2001) studied pupils from different schools and stated that those who read complex fiction, watched TV documentaries, and visited museums and art galleries had increased cultural capital and higher GCSE grades. This evidences the linear relationship between cultural capital and educational attainment. This also allows the middle class to be on the advantageous side and the working class to suffer as they have less cultural capital and are considered culturally deprived.
Nevertheless, the working class simply has a culture that varies from the dominant (Nell Keddie, 1973). Educational institutions should not neglect the pupils; they should recognize the fact that they are culturally different and use different methods to help them thrive. Research by Diane Reay (1998) delved into how mothers ingrain cultural capital into their children. All mothers worked hard towards their child’s success, but those of the middle class were more educated and therefore did a better job through activities such as reading and purchasing educational toys. A youth cohort study done by the Department of Education and Skills (2002) showed that about 71% of the students in England and Wales who had at least one parent with a degree scored 5 or more GCSEs with A*-C grades. On the contrary, this attainment was only obtained by 40% of the pupils who had parents with no A Levels. This implies that parent’s education and involvement plays an important part in educational success. However, if situations at home keep being held accountable, schools will not vary teaching methods and ameliorate in spite of the fact that the school may be entirely at fault.
Setting and streaming are two major in school factors that affect educational success. Streaming is used widely in schools to segregate pupils into different groups depending on their ability. However, race and ethnicity of the students also contribute towards the band they get placed in. Working class and FSM pupils are commonly in lower bands although their abilities may be equivalent to those of the middle class (Ball, 1981). Pupils in lower streams are also likely to have bad behavior and get admitted into lower level exams unlike higher streams that are eligible for higher level GCSEs. Higher sets and streams have more experienced and qualified teachers that provide more challenging work while lower levels are taught simplified content (Gamoran, 2000). The method of streaming can exacerbate the inequalities more than subject-specific setting. Nonetheless, both methods can hinder educational success since pupils of lower bands develop a negative academic self-concept and are unlikely to transfer to higher bands.
In conclusion, educational success can be strongly influenced by factors in school and the environment at home. Working class parents lack the dominant middle class culture and the economic capital needed to embed favorable values in their children and purchase the right resources for success. Howbeit, pupils may overcome material and cultural deprivations yet still perform lower than the middle class due to labeling done by teachers. The appearances, speech and behaviors of working class are negatively labeled and therefore lower social class is viewed as a barrier to learning. Diminishing these prejudices in the classroom could have a significant effect and help in sustaining an equal education system.