Topic 1 – Class differences
Introduction – Sociologists have put forward a number of explanations. However, we can group
these into ‘internal’ and ‘external’ explanations or factors. Internal factors are within schools and the
education system, such as interactions between pupils and teachers and inequalities between
schools. External factors are outside of the education system, such as the influence of home and
family background and wider society.
External factors:
Cultural Deprivation
Language
Basil Bernstein identifies differences between working-class and middle-class
language that influence achievement. He distinguishes between two types of speech
code the restricted code and elaborated code. The restricted code is typically used
by the working class. It has a limited vocabulary and is based on the use of short,
often unfinished, grammatically simple sentences. Speech is predictable and may
involve only a single word, or even just a gesture instead. It is descriptive not
analytic. The elaborated code is typically used by the middle class. It has a wider
vocabulary and is based on longer, grammatically more complex sentences. Speech
is more varied and communicates abstract ideas. These differences in speech code
give middle-class children an advantage at school and put working class children at a
disadvantage. This is because the elaborated code is the language used by teachers,
textbooks and exams. Not only is it taken as the ‘correct’ way to speak and write,
but in Bernstein’s view it is also more effective tool for analysing and for expressing
thoughts clearly and effectively. Early socialisation into the elaborated code means
that middle-class children are already fluent users of the code when they start
school. Thus, they feel ‘at home’ in school and are more likely to succeed. By
contrast, working class lacking the code are likely to feel excluded and to be less
successful. Labov found that when allowed to converse in language that children are
comfortable with, they could express sophisticated ideas. He interviewed black
working-class children from Harlem using a range of different interviewers with
different linguistic styles. Thus, this suggests that children are disadvantaged if they
are forced to ‘fit in’ with the dominant model of language use.
Parent’s education
Cultural deprivation theorists argue that parent’s attitudes to education are a key
factor affecting children’s achievement. Douglas found that working class parents
placed less value on education. As a result, they were less ambitious for their
children, gave them less encouragement and took less interest in their education.
They visited schools less often and were less likely to discuss their children’s
progress with teachers. As a result, their children had lower levels of motivation and
achievement. This is important because its effects children’s achievement and since
middle class parents tend to be better educated, they are able to give their children
an advantage by how they socialise them. Blackstone and Mortimore argue that
working class parents are not necessarily less involved in child’s education. Instead
Introduction – Sociologists have put forward a number of explanations. However, we can group
these into ‘internal’ and ‘external’ explanations or factors. Internal factors are within schools and the
education system, such as interactions between pupils and teachers and inequalities between
schools. External factors are outside of the education system, such as the influence of home and
family background and wider society.
External factors:
Cultural Deprivation
Language
Basil Bernstein identifies differences between working-class and middle-class
language that influence achievement. He distinguishes between two types of speech
code the restricted code and elaborated code. The restricted code is typically used
by the working class. It has a limited vocabulary and is based on the use of short,
often unfinished, grammatically simple sentences. Speech is predictable and may
involve only a single word, or even just a gesture instead. It is descriptive not
analytic. The elaborated code is typically used by the middle class. It has a wider
vocabulary and is based on longer, grammatically more complex sentences. Speech
is more varied and communicates abstract ideas. These differences in speech code
give middle-class children an advantage at school and put working class children at a
disadvantage. This is because the elaborated code is the language used by teachers,
textbooks and exams. Not only is it taken as the ‘correct’ way to speak and write,
but in Bernstein’s view it is also more effective tool for analysing and for expressing
thoughts clearly and effectively. Early socialisation into the elaborated code means
that middle-class children are already fluent users of the code when they start
school. Thus, they feel ‘at home’ in school and are more likely to succeed. By
contrast, working class lacking the code are likely to feel excluded and to be less
successful. Labov found that when allowed to converse in language that children are
comfortable with, they could express sophisticated ideas. He interviewed black
working-class children from Harlem using a range of different interviewers with
different linguistic styles. Thus, this suggests that children are disadvantaged if they
are forced to ‘fit in’ with the dominant model of language use.
Parent’s education
Cultural deprivation theorists argue that parent’s attitudes to education are a key
factor affecting children’s achievement. Douglas found that working class parents
placed less value on education. As a result, they were less ambitious for their
children, gave them less encouragement and took less interest in their education.
They visited schools less often and were less likely to discuss their children’s
progress with teachers. As a result, their children had lower levels of motivation and
achievement. This is important because its effects children’s achievement and since
middle class parents tend to be better educated, they are able to give their children
an advantage by how they socialise them. Blackstone and Mortimore argue that
working class parents are not necessarily less involved in child’s education. Instead
