Unequal Childhoods: A Case Study of Lareau’s Accomplishment of Natural Growth

Introduction

Education is often seen as a path for social mobility, but children from middle-class families typically outperform those from working-class and poor families.
In Britain, there's an 18-month educational attainment gap between disadvantaged 16-year-olds and their middle-class peers at the end of secondary school, despite efforts to close this gap.
Schools receive extra funding to support disadvantaged pupils, but families don't get similar support.
Parents may feel at odds with wealthier counterparts due to a lifetime of inequality in accessing and managing the education system.

Class-Based Differences in Parental Engagement

The article reviews literature on class-based differences in parental engagement and involvement in education, considering the wider policy context.
Lareau's framework suggests middle-class parents adopt an interventionist approach, while working-class and poor parents prefer unstructured learning, allowing children to explore.
The latter approach may disadvantage working-class and poor children in the education system.
The article uses case studies to illustrate how parents feel marginalized and disconnected, impacting their engagement in their children’s education.

International Context

International literature shows educational class stratification in exam performance, vocational education, and access to higher education.
Parental engagement is crucial for closing the attainment gap, both in the UK and internationally.
Ule et al. (2015) found that poor city area parents recognize their roles but perceive a lack of school support.
Some working-class parents feel unwanted by teachers, leading to a lack of agency.

Political Context in the UK

In the UK, parents are scrutinized and encouraged to modify their behavior to fit the education system.
A ‘crisis in parenting’ narrative demonizes individual parents for moral failings, overlooking socioeconomic inequalities.
This ‘political economy of parenting’ promotes ‘good’ and ‘bad’ parental constructs, legitimizing surveillance and welfare cuts.
Policies like the Troubled Families programme blame parents for social ills, ignoring wider social, economic, or political factors.
Early parenting interventions target ‘sub-optimal parenting’ while neglecting structural barriers that disadvantage marginalized families.
These discourses pathologize parenting preferences that don't fit a middle-class, concerted cultivation model.
Government interventions aim to ‘remodel’ parents, blaming them for children’s reduced life chances and obscuring structural factors.
The myth that educational inequality can be tackled through effective parenting is perpetuated, leaving systemic barriers unquestioned.

Class Distinctions and Lived Experiences

Crozier argues for a ‘separation between home and school,’ marginalizing working-class parents.
This marginalization excludes them from accessing the knowledge, skills, and social networks needed to navigate the education system.
Contemporary analysis acknowledges that intersectionality (gender, race) influences working-class families’ experiences.
Savage argues that class distinctions are fueled by the transmission of advantage through cultural capital.
Skeggs found that some working-class women experience self-doubt and fear negative judgment.
The article interprets working-class mothers’ experiences through Lareau’s class-based typology.

Lareau’s Typology: Unequal Childhoods

Lareau proposed that middle-class parents engage in ‘concerted cultivation,’ while working-class and poor parents facilitate the ‘accomplishment of natural growth’ (Lareau, 2011, p. 1).
Concerted cultivation: Involves equipping children with experiences and resources to navigate middle-class society and the school system.
- Includes organized activities, vocabulary development through reasoning and reading, and active involvement in school.
Accomplishment of natural growth: Working-class children have more freedom to organize leisure; parents provide comfort, food, shelter, and basic support (Lareau, 2011, p. 408).
- Focuses on safety, discipline, and regulating behavior, without active involvement in schools (Lareau, 2003, p. 66).
Middle-class parents reason with children through discussion, while working-class families use directives.
Middle-class children gain a ‘sense of entitlement,’ while working-class children develop ‘an emerging sense of distance, distrust, and constraint’ (Lareau, 2011, p. 3).

Parental Behavior

Working-class parents are more likely to accept authority and distance themselves from school.
Some are ‘baffled, intimidated and subdued’ in parent–teacher conferences (Lareau, 2011, p. 409).
They may be less aware of their children’s school situation or dismiss school rules as unreasonable.
Communication frustrations lead to feelings of powerlessness (Lareau, 2011).

Bourdieu’s Theory of Social Reproduction

Lareau’s typology is embedded in Bourdieu’s theory, which posited that middle-class parents instill intellectual content complementary to educational institutions.
Bourdieu (1997) argued that ease within the social world is dictated by capital, and those with more assets gain more qualifications.
Social reproduction is maintained, and middle-class children move in their world ‘as a fish in water’ (Bourdieu, 1990, p. 108).
Schools impose systems difficult for those with lower cultural capital.
Working-class parents lack the ‘feel for the game’ (Bourdieu & Wacquant, 1992, p. 128) and view secondary school as ‘not for us’ (Bourdieu, 2000, p. 185).

Limitations of Lareau’s Work

Lareau lacks appreciation of intersectionality, especially race.
She argues social class is more influential than race, despite black parents recalling racism in her research (Pearce, 2004).
The views of children are not included in the analysis.
Despite critiques, concerted cultivation and accomplishment of natural growth remain relevant in educational sociology.
Power struggles influence relationships between school and both middle-class and working-class families.
This article applies these concepts to a British working-class sample, focusing on intervention with institutions, characterized by ‘powerlessness and frustration’ and ‘conflict between child-rearing practices’ (Lareau, 2003, p. 31).

Methodology

The article uses case studies from a larger research project conducted before the COVID-19 outbreak.
The project sought to understand barriers faced by families in supporting their children’s education, particularly in areas experiencing poverty.
Research was conducted in post-industrial, coastal communities in the North-West of England, with high child poverty levels.
These areas are ‘left behind’ (Sensier & Devine, 2017), with high deprivation, poor health (Depledge et al., 2017), and educational isolation (Ovenden-Hope & Passy, 2019).
77 parents and caregivers of secondary school children, considered ‘disadvantaged’ (eligible for free school meals), participated in focus groups or interviews.
The larger study found families experienced difficulty accessing secondary education, feeling a physical and symbolic distance and lacking cultural capital (Bourdieu, 1977).
Families felt aligned with primary schools' values but at odds with secondary schools’ targets and rigid systems.
This led to withdrawal from their children’s education at secondary school.
The case studies provide a thorough understanding of these lived experiences, applying the accomplishment of natural growth approach.

Sample, Data Collection, and Analysis

A selective case study approach was chosen to highlight overarching themes of mothers’ engagement in different situations (Yin, 2011).
Typical case sampling was used to select two cases sharing characteristics typical of the sample but with different stories.
Two mothers were selected who reported not actively engaging with their children’s secondary educational institutions and were classified as ‘disadvantaged’.
The accounts are illustrative of the wider research sample, setting ‘the bar of what is standard or “typical”’ (Etikan et al., 2016, p. 3).
Written transcripts underwent data-driven thematic analysis using NVivo software (Braun & Clarke, 2006).
This revealed patterns, generated initial codes, and developed themes to understand parents’ experiences.
Supplementary analysis revealed the relevance of Lareau’s framework.
Data were reanalyzed using a theory-driven thematic analysis, developing specific codes and themes.
Key quotations were extrapolated to frame the results section.

Sample Considerations

Contextual differences exist between this research and Lareau’s original research.
- Social constructions and systems relating to class and education vary between the UK and the USA.
- The USA has a more explicit class system, strongly evidenced in access to health care (Krieger et al., 2005).
- The welfare system is different, with the UK providing working tax credits.
- Neighborhood effects have a lesser impact in the UK (Orum & Musterd, 2019).
- The education system differs in funding allocation and social segregation, with American schools more dependent on local funding (Brill, 2011).
Methodological differences:
- The current study does not include the views of middle-class families or those from different ethnic backgrounds.
- It does not comment on household conditions.
- It relies on the mothers’ interpretation of their encounters with schools.
Similarities:
- Like Lareau’s sample, many mothers experienced mental ill health and substance abuse in those close to them.
- Mothers always adopted the role of principal caregiver.
The article presents two case study examples applying Lareau’s accomplishment of natural growth.
- Sarah: Attempted to engage but withdrew due to feeling undervalued.
- Jenny: Tried to work with school but found the process humiliating and disempowering.
The authors drew on Kvale’s metaphor for process, where knowledge is constructed alongside the respondent (Kvale, 1996).
The case studies illustrate how these experiences impact on the lives of families, showing their feelings of powerlessness, frustration and disconnection.
Sarah and Jenny are not actively involved in schools, feeling disconnected and seeing the child-rearing approach of schools as conflicting with their own (Lareau, 2003).

Findings

Sarah: A Mother Feeling Disconnected

Sarah (42) grew up in a strict Jehovah Witness household, caring for her siblings after her mother left.
She has two children from previous relationships, both of whom had substance misuse issues.
She works as a carer and receives working tax credits.
Sarah initially had a positive relationship with her children’s primary school and volunteered there.
Negative experiences, mainly in communications with teaching staff, created distance and distrust.
Sarah lacked the confidence to help her children with their secondary school work and struggled with unsociable hours and maintaining discipline.

Sense of Powerlessness and Frustration

Lareau posited that working-class and poor parents experience powerlessness and frustration due to disconnection with school.
A lack of trust and comfort was mentioned by Sarah.
Sarah initially volunteered at her daughter’s primary school and enrolled on a training programme but felt undermined when she couldn't complete the placement due to work.
Sarah described the ‘abrasive and abrupt’ approach left a nasty taste in her mouth, causing her to leave the course.
This suggests frustration with a system that placed demands she couldn’t meet, leaving her feeling powerless.
Sarah’s accounts suggest confidence plays a significant role in parents’ ability to contact school.
Inflexible and inaccessible systems can create disconnect and distrust.
This resonates with the ‘accomplishment of natural growth’ approach (Lareau, 2003).

Conflict Between Child-Rearing Practices

Schools promote a concerted cultivation approach, which is at odds with the accomplishment of natural growth approach.
Sarah said, ‘I want both of my children to do well but most of my energies have been focused on the more caring side of things rather than pushing them academically’.
She saw her role as supporting her children but admits discipline was a ‘grey area’, wanting them to be happy.
This is consistent with the accomplishment of natural growth approach, ‘allowing children to be children’ (Lareau, 2003, p. 76).
Sarah perceives her child-rearing practices as different to those of schools, stemming from her childhood.
Sarah reflected on her father’s lack of engagement in her education, mirroring her own lack of engagement.
Sarah ‘often fear [s] doing “the wrong thing” in school-related matters’ (Lareau, 2003, p. 198).
She feels disempowered and disconnected from school, resulting in withdrawal.

Jenny: A Frustrated Mother

Jenny (39), married with four children, grew up in the same area.
She enjoyed school until her parents’ divorce at 12, which led to missing school and drinking with older teens.
Her parents couldn't afford the equipment to enable her ambition to become a chef.
She met her husband and started a family.
She volunteers at the local community centre, and her husband is unable to work due to a long-term health condition.
Jenny reported no problems communicating with primary school until two of her sons presented with behavioral problems in Year 6, triggering a referral to secondary school.
She initially believed her children were misbehaving but felt teachers were discriminating against them.
This emerged after meetings where she felt belittled but lacked confidence to speak out.
She questioned herself, feeling guilty for not believing her children, and felt disconnected, with cliques existing amongst teachers.
School called home frequently, causing anxiety.
Eventually, Jenny removed these two sons from mainstream education, educating them at home and in a local community center.

Sense of Powerlessness and Frustration

Lareau proposed that working-class and poor parents mistrust teachers’ judgments but don't challenge them due to power imbalance (Lareau, 2003, p. 217).
Jenny’s experiences support this, saying she felt pushed out, intimidated, and humiliated.
Jenny shared her experiences of her sons’ behavior and feeling teachers were pushing them out.
These accounts suggest a ‘sense of distance and distrust, of exclusion and risk, with school’ (Lareau, 2003, p. 227), and felt worried, powerless and scared (Lareau, 2003, p. 230).
Jenny recalled hostile communications and avoiding contact where possible.
She recounted difficulties communicating with a teacher and a strong distrust in school and other authority figures (Lareau, 2003, p. 218).
Jenny felt judged and discriminated against, with meetings leaving her in tears.
Like Lareau’s mothers, Jenny was intimidated by the professional experts.
The experience of intimidation and humiliation significantly impacted Jenny, leading to depression and panic attacks.
This example illustrates how home–school relations can impact on the emotional well-being of the parent.
Jenny’s accounts suggest strained communications can result in feeling judged, causing frustration and hostile reactions.

Conflict Between Child-Rearing Practices at Home and School

Jenny’s values were centered on nurturing and caring for her family.
She saw her role as being indirect, gently guiding her children, which resonates with Lareau’s argument that ‘child-rearing is balanced by allowing children to be children’ (Lareau, 2003, p. 76).
This was perceived as different to secondary school, where teachers were under pressure to achieve targets, with Jenny expressing ‘it’s all about getting the ticks in the boxes’.
Jenny perceived an impersonal approach to teaching, prioritizing targets over individual pupils' welfare.
Jenny’s values differed from how she perceived secondary school teachers’ values.
Jenny was striving for her children to be happy through acting as a gentle guide.

Discussion

Results revealed working-class parents experienced frustration, powerlessness, and disconnection with secondary school.
Conflict between school and home practices contributed to minimal contact with school.
This resonates with Lareau’s work, where mothers expressed ‘an emerging sense of distance, distrust, and constraint’ (Lareau, 2011, p. 3).
Lareau’s findings that mothers were ‘baffled, intimidated and subdued’ (Lareau, 2011, p. 409) was also reflected.
Parents mostly perceived a role in their children’s education as aligned with Lareau’s concept of accomplishment of natural growth (Lareau, 2011).
The two mothers’ accounts serve as detailed case study examples that typify the experiences of many disadvantaged parents.
Powerlessness and frustration were strong features, with conflict, intimidation, and humiliation eroding trust and connections.
As Lareau summarized regarding one mother, ‘she distrusted school personnel. She felt bullied and powerless’ (Lareau, 2003, p. 243).
Parenting practices are ‘accorded different social values by important social institutions’ (Lareau, 2003, p. 241).
Many differences are ‘down to social class position’ (Lareau, 2003, p. 214).
Traumatic childhood experiences and lack of educational capital led these mothers to focus on protection and comfort.
Economic resources played a part, including having to work unsociable hours and lack of finance due to unemployment.
Both mothers spoke about lacking the necessary educational resources and social networks to support their children.
Despite challenges, both mothers exhibited drive and agency to support their children.
These findings contribute to understanding issues around intersectionality, where being a mother and working class can result in feeling torn.

Implications for Educational Practice

Ofsted monitors schools’ efforts to engage parents.
The experiences of mothers provide evidence to reflect on engagement and spending of Pupil Premium funding.
Concerted cultivation and accomplishment of natural growth provide a framework to understand class-based differences.
Understanding that ‘disadvantaged’ parents may feel disempowered allows sympathetic interventions to promote engagement.
Schools should utilize the typology to develop strategies that stress the schools’ values surrounding ensuring well-being.
Schools must be clear in communicating how this can promote the outcomes valued by parents.
Results complement previous literature, suggesting that some parents may feel uneasy when communicating with schools (Von Otter, 2014).
A revised structure for events, such as parents’ evenings, could be implemented to build trust and accommodate perceived barriers.
Policies based on concerted cultivation can marginalize parents who favor the natural accomplishment of growth approach (Vincent & Maxwell, 2016).

Policy Implications

This article highlights the lived experience of inequalities of some working-class families.
The system is oriented towards middle-class parents.
Policy must promote inclusivity to all families.
Policy should prioritize reducing socioeconomic differences through building parents’ capabilities (Hartas, 2014).
We need to shift from individualist deficit construction to a model which respects the contexts of families (Goodall, 2019).
The analysis focuses on the accounts of two mothers and cannot be generalized.
More research is needed to understand the experiences of working-class mothers, particularly in ‘left-behind’ communities.
Further research with fathers and different groups would help reveal the role of intersectionality.
Research would benefit from allowing the voice of the child and the school to be heard.
Cross-cultural differences between the USA and the UK need to be noted.

Conclusion

The role of parents in education has been intensified under lockdown measures during the Covid-19 outbreak.
Individualist policies neglect structural barriers faced by marginalized parents.
With the educational attainment gap widening, Lareau’s class analysis is more relevant than ever. In a world where education is becoming increasingly divided, we need to critically reflect on the impact this is having on our most disadvantaged families.
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Ethical approval was granted by the University of Central Lancashire BAHSS Ethics Committee (application number BAHSS 179) and complied with all BERA Ethical Guidelines.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study and all data were anonymised.
Research data are not shared.