Education and social class
External factors
IQ theories:
Argue that social class differences in education are genetically transmitted.
Principles of IQ theory are: intelligence can be defined precisely, measured and
standardised, based on statistical data which suggests a positive correlation
between intelligence measured by IQ tests and social class, studies of identical
twins suggest that genetic inheritance explains between 40% and 80% of
intelligence differences.
To conclude, IQ theorists suggest that working class students are on average
unsuccessful educationally relative to upper and middle class students because
they’re less intelligence, mainly due to their inheritance of ‘less intelligent
genes’.
Sociological criticisms of IQ theories:
- Its difficult to define what intelligence is
- IQ tests can be questioned for whether they can accurately measure IQ
- IQ tests may be culturally biased against w/c kids, testing knowledge
rather than intelligence.
Sociologists have concluded that IQ tests cannot provide an accurate measure of
intelligence and that its impossible to determine the relative importance of
genetic and environmental factors as determinants of intelligence. “The Home
and the School” by JWB Douglas [1964] demonstrated that middle class
children of “average” intelligence were far more likely than working class
children of “average” intelligence to pass the 11+ examination which clearly
suggests that performance in the 11+ examination was affected by social and
environmental factors.
Cultural deprivation:
Based on the idea that certain social groups lack the necessary norms and
values to succeed in education.
Hyman: suggested the values possessed by W/C hindered their educational
success in comparison to M/C students. His reasons for this:
- W/C see upward social mobility as undesirable, as it takes away from their
solidarity they find in their communities.
- Upward social mobility is difficult to achieve for W/C people, effort and
time involved risks like financial loss of income in event of failure, whereas
learning a W/C trade doesn’t involve such risk.
- W/C parents and children are likely to place less importance on formal
education as a possible route to this unachievable social mobility
Sugarman (1970):
, Education and social class
- W/C students seek immediate gratification, they focus on the present
without considering how it may affect their future, this is known as present
time orientation. They are less willing to make present tense sacrifices to
increase chances of educational success.
- Other the other hand, M/C attitudes are based on deferred gratification,
more willing to postpone something in the present for the future/
- W/c students are also more likely to adopt a fatalistic attitude, whereby
they believe their fate is out of their hands and there is nothing they can
do about their position in society. M/c students are less likely to take such
a fatalistic view and therefore strive to achieve in education as they
believe it will positively impact upon their futures.
- The w/c also believe that economic advance is more likely to be achieved
by collective rather than individual means. Membership of Trade Unions
etc will lead to collective improvement of working class living standards,
not individualistic achievements such as educational qualifications. They
are more collectivistic.
- Parental attitudes and life choices are mirrored in their attitudes to their
children's education.
JWB Douglas – home and school – provides empirical evidence to support Hyman
and Sugarman:
- Investigated the primary school (7-11) careers of 5k+ children, then
carried out a follow up study on 4k of the original sample of pupils at 16+/
- Pupils in original sample were classified according to social class
background and according to intellectual ability at age of 8.
- Douglas explanation stressed social class differences in pupils, size of
family and differences in school quality.
- Middle class parents were more likely to be interested in their child’s
education than that of w/c parents.
- Parental interest: frequency of parents attendance at parents evenings
and also by reference to teachers assessments of parental interest.
Douglas also concluded that social class differences in early socialisation
processes were significant. He found M/C parents were more likely to:
- Encourage educational play activities
- Set high standards
- Reward educational achievements.
Criticism of theories based upon concept of cultural deprivation:
- Nell Keddie: believes cultural deprivation theory is a myth which blames
W/C for their educational failure. She argues W/C culture is not deprived its
just different and the fault lies with education system that doesn’t do
enough to accommodate W/C norms and values.
- Sugarman use of questionnaire has methodological limitations, can be
argued the data is not valid in social class terms due to it failing to
External factors
IQ theories:
Argue that social class differences in education are genetically transmitted.
Principles of IQ theory are: intelligence can be defined precisely, measured and
standardised, based on statistical data which suggests a positive correlation
between intelligence measured by IQ tests and social class, studies of identical
twins suggest that genetic inheritance explains between 40% and 80% of
intelligence differences.
To conclude, IQ theorists suggest that working class students are on average
unsuccessful educationally relative to upper and middle class students because
they’re less intelligence, mainly due to their inheritance of ‘less intelligent
genes’.
Sociological criticisms of IQ theories:
- Its difficult to define what intelligence is
- IQ tests can be questioned for whether they can accurately measure IQ
- IQ tests may be culturally biased against w/c kids, testing knowledge
rather than intelligence.
Sociologists have concluded that IQ tests cannot provide an accurate measure of
intelligence and that its impossible to determine the relative importance of
genetic and environmental factors as determinants of intelligence. “The Home
and the School” by JWB Douglas [1964] demonstrated that middle class
children of “average” intelligence were far more likely than working class
children of “average” intelligence to pass the 11+ examination which clearly
suggests that performance in the 11+ examination was affected by social and
environmental factors.
Cultural deprivation:
Based on the idea that certain social groups lack the necessary norms and
values to succeed in education.
Hyman: suggested the values possessed by W/C hindered their educational
success in comparison to M/C students. His reasons for this:
- W/C see upward social mobility as undesirable, as it takes away from their
solidarity they find in their communities.
- Upward social mobility is difficult to achieve for W/C people, effort and
time involved risks like financial loss of income in event of failure, whereas
learning a W/C trade doesn’t involve such risk.
- W/C parents and children are likely to place less importance on formal
education as a possible route to this unachievable social mobility
Sugarman (1970):
, Education and social class
- W/C students seek immediate gratification, they focus on the present
without considering how it may affect their future, this is known as present
time orientation. They are less willing to make present tense sacrifices to
increase chances of educational success.
- Other the other hand, M/C attitudes are based on deferred gratification,
more willing to postpone something in the present for the future/
- W/c students are also more likely to adopt a fatalistic attitude, whereby
they believe their fate is out of their hands and there is nothing they can
do about their position in society. M/c students are less likely to take such
a fatalistic view and therefore strive to achieve in education as they
believe it will positively impact upon their futures.
- The w/c also believe that economic advance is more likely to be achieved
by collective rather than individual means. Membership of Trade Unions
etc will lead to collective improvement of working class living standards,
not individualistic achievements such as educational qualifications. They
are more collectivistic.
- Parental attitudes and life choices are mirrored in their attitudes to their
children's education.
JWB Douglas – home and school – provides empirical evidence to support Hyman
and Sugarman:
- Investigated the primary school (7-11) careers of 5k+ children, then
carried out a follow up study on 4k of the original sample of pupils at 16+/
- Pupils in original sample were classified according to social class
background and according to intellectual ability at age of 8.
- Douglas explanation stressed social class differences in pupils, size of
family and differences in school quality.
- Middle class parents were more likely to be interested in their child’s
education than that of w/c parents.
- Parental interest: frequency of parents attendance at parents evenings
and also by reference to teachers assessments of parental interest.
Douglas also concluded that social class differences in early socialisation
processes were significant. He found M/C parents were more likely to:
- Encourage educational play activities
- Set high standards
- Reward educational achievements.
Criticism of theories based upon concept of cultural deprivation:
- Nell Keddie: believes cultural deprivation theory is a myth which blames
W/C for their educational failure. She argues W/C culture is not deprived its
just different and the fault lies with education system that doesn’t do
enough to accommodate W/C norms and values.
- Sugarman use of questionnaire has methodological limitations, can be
argued the data is not valid in social class terms due to it failing to
