Sociology Essay Some theorists think that cultural deprivation is the reason why working class children fail and middle class children succeed. To succeed in education you will need cultural equipment (language, self-discipline and reasoning skills) something that the working class children lack. They lack this equipment because their parents cannot socialise properly with their children, so these children grow up culturally deprived leading to their under-achievement at school. Whereas middle class children have parents who can socialise properly with them, giving them all the cultural equipment they need. Intellectual development is one aspect to cultural deprivation.
They are able to manipulate the education system to their advantage which means their children have a better chance at doing well in school. Disconnected-local choosers and semi-skilled choosers are working-class parents who have a lack of cultural capital and therefore their child’s academic progress suffers as they are usually sent to ‘local’ schools which they aren’t necessarily best suited for. Children who have cultural capital also have an elaborated code (wider vocabulary) which gives them an advantage at school as it is the code used by teachers and in textbooks. The elaborated code is typically used by middle class and helps with their academic achievement. Children with a lack of cultural capital are more likely to use the restricted code (limited vocabulary) which disadvantages them at school as they feel excluded and are therefore less successful.
Cultural deprivation sociologists see three factors as accountable for working-class under-achievement. One such factor being the lack of intellectual stimulation. Working class families are less likely to give their children educational toys and activities that will stimulate their thinking and reasoning skills, and less likely to read them. This effects their intellectual development so that when they begin school they are at a disadvantage compared with middle-class children. Another factor responsible for working-class under-achievement is the restricted speech code.
Explainining class differences in achievement Cultural deprivation theory blames the failings of the child on his/her background. This diverts the attention from the educational system which may contribute to, or account for, class differences in attainment. Cultural deprivation theorists argue that many working-class homes lack the books, educational toys and activities that would stimulate a child’s intellectual development. Bernstein and Young (1967) found that the way mothers think about and choose toys has an influence on their child’s intellectual development. Middle-class mothers are more likely to have more of an interest in their child’s intellectual development.
Many EMG children also do not have that initial push of how important education is for them. They may have a fatalistic view on where they see themselves fitting into to society which may rub on to their children. Sugarman did a lot of research on this and found it as being one of the top reasons why children can fail in education. Children who believe their future is already predetermined will not put as much focus on education as they think they will only get working-class jobs. As parents may be new to the UK or not speak English they may not understand the educational system and the application process.
The questionnaires asked questions about reading and TV viewing habits. The conclusion was that those that read complex fiction and watched documentaries for example developed a greater vocabulary and knowledge, thus doing better in school. However, working class parents often can’t support their children in the same way due to material deprivation, and therefore their children are more culturally deprived, this clearly shows that cultural factors are a main cause for social class differences in educational achievement. Use of language between different social classes is also under cultural deprivation and can cause educational achievement differences. Bernstein distinguishes between two speech codes that he associates with two social classes, one being the restricted code, which he commonly associates with the working class where they use one word answers or hand gestures to communicate.
In a poor socioeconomic group, students are more likely to drop out of school; this happens since the environment around them does not allow them to achieve an academic goal or have parents who support them. The government should implement more programs to help in the contribution for poor families. With poverty, children can experience stress or depression, hence, not obtaining a career.
Also, how it should be banned, there are, believe it or not, some positives to all of the negatives. One, it is good for kids who are behind or need extra help. For example, a student does not understand the material and is academically struggling. This student should be given homework to help the material to gradually become easier and raise the students grades. Greg Toppo agrees with these statements on the positivity of homework for struggling students.
If a W.C student is labelled by a middle-class (M.C) teacher the student often believe that the teacher is right therefore they take that label they have been given and they become a self-fulfilling prophecy which means they accept the label they have been given and stay that standard, this is basically saying if a student is labelled negatively they stay negative because they are ‘fulfilling their own prophecy’ so they are now going to underachieve in education. This is effected by poverty due to W.C generally not being able to afford nice uniforms so the teacher can tell they come from a W.C background because they don’t look as smart as the M.C students. Another reason in the claim that poverty is the main reason for W.C underachievement is because they are generally more fatalistic. If a W.C child is fatalistic in school then it means that they are also culturally deprived, because they are culturally deprived they have attitudes which insist that they are not going to do well in school because for example their parents didn’t then they will not try to get an education as they are fatalistic about being setup to fail in
Aaron Cicourel and John Kitsuse’s study of educational counsellors in an American High school shows how labelling can disadvantage working-class students and it states in item A that ‘they were negatively labelled as non-academic and often as ‘difficult’’. This is because counsellors play an important role in deciding which students will get onto courses that prepare them for higher education. They found from their study that although they claimed to judge them on their ability, in practice they mainly judged them on the basis of their social class and/or race. Even where students had similar grades, counsellors were more likely to label middle-class