Class differences in achievement (1) external factors

External factors

These are factors a-outside the education system as the influence of home 

Cultural deprivation

The theory that working class children are inadequately socialised and therefore lack the right culture needed for education; e.g their families do not instil the value for deferred gratification.

Cultural deprivation with class

• Class differences in children’s development and achievement appear very early in life. E.g nationwide study by Centre of Longitudinal Studies (2007) found that by the age of 3, children from disadvantaged backgrounds are already up to one year behind those from more privileged homes and the gap widens with age.

• Sociologists claim that this is the result of cultural deprivation. They argue that most of us begin to acquire the basic values, attitudes and skills that are needed for educational success through primary socialisaion in the family.

• This ‘cultural equipment includes such things such as language, self-discipline and reasoning skills.

How does w/c family affect education?

• However, w/c families may fail to socialise their children adequately. They children then grow up ‘culturally deprived’.

• Therefore, they lack cultural equipment needed to do well in school and so they underachieve.

• There are 3 aspects of cultural deprivation: Language, parents’ education and working-class subculture.

Cultural deprivation: Language

• The way parents communicate with their children affects their cognitive (intellectual) development and their ability to benefit from the process of schooling.

• Studies by Hubbs-Trait et al (2002) and Leon Feinstein (2008) show that m/c parents, more qualified, use challenging language and praise, which boosts cognitive performance and confidence.

• In contrast, w/c parents use simpler, decriptive language, leading to lower cognitive outcomes. 

Cultural Deprivation: Language → Speech codes

Basil Bernstein (1975) identifies two speech codes:

The RESTRICTED code, common in w/c families, is simple, context-bound, and descriptive.

The ELABORATED code, used by m/c families, which is complex, content-free and suited to academic settings. 

This impacts achievement on getting a good job because in a interview if you use elaborate code the interviewer will be more inclinded to give you the job compared to being dull and have limited conversation (restricted code).

Cultural deprivation: Parents’ education

Douglas (1964) found that w/c parents play less value on education. Therefore, they are less ambitious for their children. gave them less encouragement and took less in their education. They visited schools less often and were less likely to discuss their children progress with teachers. As a result, their children has lower levels of motivation and achievement.

Feinstein (2008): argues that parents own education is the most important factor affecting children’s achievement, and since m/c parents tend to be better educated, they are able to give their children an advantage by how they socialise them.

Cultural deprivation: parents education → Attitudes to education

Douglas (1964) → found that w/c parents often place less value in education, show less ambition for their children, and engage less with their schooling. E.g not attending parents evening

Cultural deprivation: parents education → Parenting style

Feinstein (2008) → suggests that parents with higher qualification use consistent discipline and high expectations, encouraging independence and active learning. 

In contrast, less qualified parent may reply on harsh discipline, limiting their children’s independence and school motivation.

Cultural deprivation: parents education → Educational behaviours

Middle-class parents with higher qualification engage in educational activities (e.g reading, helping with homework), foster better school relationships, and encourage museum visits etc. 

Cultural deprivation: parents education → Use of income

Higher-qualified parents invest in educational resources like books and nutritious food.

Bernstein and Young (1967) → found that m/c parents are more likely to purchase materials that stimulate learning, while w/c parents may lack such resources. 

Cultural deprivation: Working-class subculture

A subculture is a group whose attitudes and values differ from those of the mainstream culture. 

Sugarman (1970) → argues that w/c subculture has 4 key features that acts as a barrier to educational achievement:

• Fatalism: belief in fate, unlike m/c beliefs in self-improvement 

• Collectivism: Prioritizing group over individual success, whereas m/c values individual advancement. 

• Immediate gratification: Seeking instant pleasure, unlike m/c preferences for future rewards. 

• Present-time orientation: Focus on the present, rather than future planning valued by m/c

These values, passed down by w/c parents, 

Sugarman attributes these differences to the nature of w/c jobs, which lacks security, advancement, and long-term prospect, unlike middle-class careers. 

Criticism of Cultural Deprivation → Compensatory education

• Compensatory education programmes aim to tackle the problem of culture deprivation by providing extra resources to schools and communities in deprived areas.

• Example: Operation Head Start in US. a multi-billion dollar scheme of pre-school education in poorer areas, its aim was ‘planned enrichment’ to deprived child’s environment to develop skills and instil achievement motivation. It included improving parenting skills, setting up nursery classes and home visits by educational psychologists.

• Insufficient resources → compensatory education have little impact, partly because few resources have been allocated to them

• Programmes often assume that w/c fail because they lack aspiration, the true causes of unachievement are in fact poverty and lack of resources.

Criticisms of Cultural Deprivation → The myth of cultural deprivation

• Victim Blaming → CD theory takes a ‘deficit’ view that blames their victims for their own failure. 

• Different, but not deprived → Nell Keddie (1973): describes cultural deprivation as a ‘myth’ and sees it as victim-blaming explanation. She argues that w/c children are simply culturally different, not culturally deprived. They fail because they are put at a disadvantage by an education system that is dominated by middle-class values. 

• Labelling → idea of cultural deprivation itself contributes to underachievement by acting as a negative label that teachers apply to w/c families - because a self-fulfilling prophecy that leads to failure for those labelled ‘culturally deprived’. 

• Parental interest → Parents are not interested in children education & aspirations. 

Material deprivation

• Refers to poverty and lack of material necessities such as adequate housing and income. Poverty is closely linked to educational underachievement.

• For example: Eligibility for free school meals (FSM) is a widely used measure of disadvantage. In 2019, only 51% of pupils eligible for FSM gained an average of grade 4 or above in maths and english, compared with 77% of all other people.

• Flaherty (2004) → money problems in the family are a significant factory in younger children’s non-attendance at school.

• Truancy and exclusion are more likely for children from poorer families. Children are excluded from school and unlikely to return to mainstream education, while a third of all persistent truants leave school with no qualifications.

• Nearly 90% of ‘failing’ schools are located in deprived areas.