Social Class Differences - External (TOPIC 1)
Cultural Deprivation Theory
A theory that argues the working-class lacks necessary ‘cultural equipment’ embedded in early socialisation to give to their children, which become important in retaining educational achievement. This sociological approach contains many arguments to explain this view, like the existence of a working-class subculture, difference in parents’ attitudes and values towards education, variants in language use and speech code, and cultural capital. Understandably, cultural deprivation theory is heavily criticised due to its nature of victim-blaming, demonising the W/C as deprived rather than simply different, and often generalising both social classes.
CD - Language & Speech Code
Hubbs-Tait et al (2002) - Parents that use challenging language to invoke evaluative understanding within their children often see signs of cognitive improvement.
Leon Feinstein (2008) Parents with HQ (higher qualifications, more likely to be M/C) are more likely to use language in such a way. Even further, parents with HQ often use modes of praise also to help their children develop a sense of self-esteem and competence. By contrast, parents with LQ (lower qualifications, often W/C) use language in ways that are simplistic and descriptive, such as ‘‘what’s that called?’’ when referring to an object. This usually results in lower performance.
Cultural deprivation theorists see these class differences in utilising language as indirectly affecting educational achievement, claiming that W/C language is ‘deficient’, which results in their children failing to acquire necessary language skills needed to flourish in school and academic opportunity.
Basil Bernstein (1975)
Distinguishes M/C speech vs. W/C speech in two identified codes:
Elaborated Code
Typically used by the M/C
Wider vocabulary
Elevated lexis
Communicates abstract ideas/thoughts
Standard grammar
Context-free, not dependent on the listener’s background knowledge
Restricted Code
Typically used by the W/C
Limited vocabulary
Non-standard grammar
Monosyballic
Descriptive and oversimplified
Context-bound, depends on the listener’s background understanding
EVALUATION
Speech Hierarchy - Troyna & Williams (1986) - The problem is not the child’s language but the school’s attitude towards it. Teachers have a ‘speech hierarchy’ of sorts; labelling M/C speech highest, followed by W/C speech, and finally black speech.
M/C advantage - These differences in speech codes give M/C pupils the advantage, as textbooks, exams and teachers all use the elaborated code. It is seen as the ‘correct’ way to speak and write, therefore putting W/C children at a disadvantage because their way of speech is viewed as deprived.
Solidarity - M/C children are already fluent users of the elaborated code, so they may feel more ‘at home’ than W/C children, meaning that they are more likely to succeed and flourish. W/C children whom lack this code may feel out of place and alienated, lowering achievement.
Exaggeration of Social Class Differences - Gaine and George (1999) criticise Bernstein for oversimplifying the differences between W/C and M/C speech patterns. Additionally, these trends seen may have also reduced since Bernstein initially conducted his research.
CD - Attitudes & Values
Parents’ Education
Douglas (1964) - W/C parents place less value and interest in their child’s education- were less likely to attend parents evenings and frequent communication with the school, leading to poor motivation and self esteem for W/C pupils when the value of their educational work is undermined.
Goodman & Gregg (2010) - Parental involvement with their children’s schooling is the sole important factor affecting their child’s achievement.
Leon Feinstein (2008) - Reaches similar conclusions to Goodman & Gregg- Parents’ own educational qualifications is the single most important factor affecting achievement. M/C → Higher qualifications → give their children an educational advantage by how they socialise them.
These class differences of socialisation appear in parenting styles, parents’ educational behaviours, use of income, and parental education.
Parenting Styles
Leon Feinstein - M/C parents are more likely to emphasise consistent discipline and the use of praise, encouraging self-competency and self-esteem. W/C parents apply harsh, inconsistent discipline that emphasises obedience to authority over independence.
Parents’ educational behaviours
M/C parents are more aware of what is necessary to assist their child’s educational progress. (E.g. reading them books, teaching them letters and nursery rhymes, and helping with homework.)
M/C parents are also better able to access expert advice on childrearing, to be more successful in establishing good relationships with teachers and be better at guiding their children’s interactions with school.
M/C parents also recognise the educational value of certain activities like visits to museums or libraries.
Use of income
M/C parents also tend to have higher incomes, and are thus more likely/are able to spend their income in ways that promote their child’s educational success.
Bernstein & Young (1967) - M/C mothers are more likely to buy educational toys, books and activities that stimulate intellectual development.
W/C parents are more likely to lack the material resources to buy these commodities, so their children may start school without the specific skills needed to progress.
M/C parents also have a much better understanding of nutrition and its importance in child development.
Parental education
Feinstein (2008) - Notes that while better paid, M/C parents tend to have higher qualifications, a parent’s own education has an influence on a child’s achievement in its own right, regardless of social class or income.
Thus, even within a given social class, the higher the parents’ education, the more likely their children are to succeed- helping to explain why not all children of W/C parents do equally badly, or that not all children of M/C parents perform equally well.