Social class and inequality within the education system in the UK - Essay Example

?Historical social context The social structure of the United Kingdom (UK) is historically directed by the element of social The UK society like many other developed countries was historically divided into caste system which was characterized by marriages within the same societal group and hereditary characterized by transmission of social status, occupation and political influence (McLean, 2006). The concept of social class remains controversial even in the twenty first century as many facets of the society continues to be influenced by factors such as occupation, wealth and education. Evidently, the UK parliament has all along been organized on the basis of social class with the upper class being represented in the house of lords and others represented by house of commons. Further, the monarch system is a representative of the wealthy social class in the political system. In the part of the education system, social problems are highly likely to be solved by having an educated society. Education started to become an important social factor in the eighteenth century not only in the United Kingdom, but across the globe (Crossley & Watson, 2011). This was witnessed by an upswing in the expansion of compulsory schooling in many countries. However, the social setting of many modern societies encourages pluralism in respects such as culture, languages, customs, values and education sciences (King, 1979). However, a clear divide in terms of the social class is still apparent within the education sector. Children from the high class commonly termed as the middle class are mainly enrolled in private and expensive schools where quality of education is guaranteed (Inkeles & Smith, 2005). However, those children from average and disadvantaged backgrounds attend government schools where resources are constrained and therefore no guarantee in terms of quality. The present study discusses social class and inequality within the education system in the UK and will achieve this by focussing on two social classes- the middle class and the working class. Social class and inequality within the education system in the UK Case Study I will be using social class as a case study to investigate evidence of difference that helps us study whether the English education system is inclusive or exclusive. In this case study I will be looking at social class and whether social class faces inequality within the English education system. I will be looking at the education system in the United Kingdom and I will be discussing the differences between middle class and working class in education. The reason for this case study is to discuss the education system in the UK in order to find evidence on how social class faces inequality and I will be doing this by using different theoretical approaches and sociological ways to discuss the relationships. There is a social class gap in the UK for educational achievement. In the UK students attainment is based on parents qualifications, income and occupation (Francis and Perry, 2010) In the UK the working class are eligible for free school meals, free school meals helps us to identify the students class and free school meal students come from a socio-economic background (Perry and Francis et al, 2010). I will be discussing the exam results of both the working and middle class. Children’s social class has a major impact on their performance and their results. The working class tend to not achieve in comparison to the middle class, the education system is biased and is produced to meet the needs of the middle class students and not the working class students (Bryant, n.d.). Children’s class has a major impact on their performance. In addition there is a gap between the middle and the working class and this could be seen through their GSCE results (Shepherd, 2010). According to Shepherd, Sedghi and Evans (2012) statistics show that there is around 27.4% attainment gap between students that are eligible for free school meals and students achieving A*-C in English and Mathematics GCSE. There are over a third of students which from a deprived homes achieved five A*-C grades in GCSE (Shepherd, Sedghi and Evans et al, 2012). Students which are eligible for free school meals indicate that their families earn less than ?16,000 per year and around 34. 6% of students achieved the above grades in comparison to students not eligible for FSM (Shepherd, Sedghi and Evans et al, 2012). Students who are eligible for FSM continue to underachieve in their GSCES in contrast to students that are not eligible for FSM (Attew, 2012). Statistics show that 18.4% of FSM students achieved GCSE’s from A*-C in 2010-11 (Attew et al, 2012). Looking at the different types of schools and the GCSE results which they obtain, private schools GCSE’s have increased and achieved the top grades (BBC, 2013). BBC (2013) reports that 32% of students obtained an A* grade in their GCSE’s. The independent schools council states that private schools have gained the top grades and four times as many as students from other schools around the country (BBC et al, 2013). Students in private school achieved seven A’s and at least two A* in their GCSE’s (BBC et al, 2013). On the other hand Academies GCSE results show that they have improved more than twice the level of other schools (Gibb, 2011). Statistics show that students achieving five or more GCSE’s including core subjects such as Math’s and English increased from 40.6% to 45.9% (Gibb et al, 2011). In contrast to maintained schools, students achieving five or more GCSE’s including the core subjects Math’s and English increased from 55.2% to 57.9%, statistics show that the biggest increase regarding GCSE results were seen in academies (Gibb et al, 2011). According to Francis and Perry (2010) working class students want to continue their higher education however students which are eligible for free school meals and achieve GCSE's higher than the national median tend to not continue to higher education. Statistics show that 19% of the working-class are likely to apply for university, 77% of the middle-class apply to university and only 4% of people that are entitled to free school meals continue to university. (Guardian, 2010 cited from Francis and Perry, 2010). On the other hand there are many universities in the UK however the top two prestigious and well known universities are: Cambridge and Oxford University. Statistics show that 11.5% of students which come from a working-class background study in Oxford University however statistics show that 12.6% of students also from a working-class background study at Cambridge University (Guardian, 2010 cited from Francis and Perry, 2010). Francis and Perry (2010) suggest that the following factors prevent or have an impact on student’s decision about continuing their higher education which is: social, economic, cultural factors. Functionalist, Marxism, Interpretivism and Critical Theory Slattery (2003) identifies that Durkheim developed a functionalist theory about society. According to Cole and Hill (2001) functionalism in education is seen as socialisation and role sharing. Functionalists believe that if you fail it is your own fault, parents fault or where you were raised up (Cole and Hill, 2001). Functionalism consists of social stability and public values (Crossman, n.d.). Functionalism provides an interpretation for each section of society and how each section helps to stabilise the society as a whole, an example of this would be the government providing education for children and taxes are paid to the government in order to maintain and keep everything in progress (Crossman et al, n.d). Relating my case study to a theory, functionalist theorists believe that if you fail it is your own fault or where you have been raised up (Cole and Hill, 2001). This interprets my case study as working-class students face difficulties with obtaining attainments and this could link to them living in a deprived area, therefore functionalists blame the working-class and suggest that it is their own fault for failing. On the other hand Slattery (2003) claims that Marx developed the theory of Alienation, the theory provides explanation on the following: Powerlessness, frustration, isolation and rejection. Critical theory was developed by sociologists from the University of Frankfurt located in Germany (Crossman, n.d.) Critical theory comes under one of the types of social theory, this theory is based on changing society and the theory reveals assumptions about understanding the world (Crossman et al, n.d). The critical theory depicts how people within the society receive different treatment (Noah, 2004). In respect to the present study, the middle class has power, control and fits well in the society. In contrary, the working class are found to suffer from frustration, rejection, isolation and are powerless. These challenges have further implication within the education sector as depicted by affordability of quality education. The middle class has the capacity of enrolling their children in academies that are known to offer quality education as opposed to working class who cannot afford to enrol their children in academies (Muller, Ringer and Simon, 2003). This brings out a gap in social class as evidenced by lack of affordability of quality education by working class as opposed to their wealthy middle class who controls the society and has the resources to afford quality education for their children. On the other hand Interpretivism is slightly related to critical theory however there are some differences which will be mentioned below. Interpretivists are against post-positivistim and do not believe or agree that the scientific method teaches you about the world (Willis, 2007). Interpretivists believe that if you want to gain understanding about social action, you should look at how the action has an effect on people, the reasons and the meanings of this action for people (Abbott, 2010). Interpretivists argue that the reality dependent on multiple meanings. These numerous meaning is quite challenging to interpret as they rely on the systems of meanings. According to Welch (2003), interpretivists has some sort of insights about the topic under study, but takes such knowledge as insufficient for studying the topic due to multiple factors, complexity and unpredictable nature of what is already known. For an interpretivist, it is paramount to understand meanings reasons and motives which are context and time bound. In respect to the case study, the intepretivist seeks to understand other than social class, what other factors causes inequality in the UK education system (Scheerens & Bosker, 2007). This is where other factors such as literacy levels, the place where a family lives, economic capability and future goals evidence the inequality levels in the UK education system. Ideally, parents’ level of literacy plays a key role in ensuring that their children also get quality education. Other factors such as are of residence, the economic status and set future goal determine whether children are enrolled in private or public schools. Evidently, the fore mentioned attributes are critical in determining the kind of education a child get and hence play a key role in furthering the level of inequality within the UK education system. Bourdieu's Theory As mentioned earlier, critical theory is concerned with a number of pathways that leads to intellectual inquiry. It articulates that a modern capitalist society cannot be achieved without carrying out radical transformations of the education sector. Further, the theory asserts that an ideal society must seek to embody the highest values of human civilization in order to enhance steady progress in attainment of prosperity, liberty and contentment of all citizens (Lauwerys, 1965). The critical theory strengthens Bourdieu's theory by trying to establish why people with the advantage of cultural, social and economic capitals are better position to perform well in academic spheres. As a matter of fact, many people think that people from socially and economically well-off backgrounds are better positioned to trounce their counterparts from disadvantaged family settings in academics. In this vein, the critical theory goes beyond what is normally known through questioning to elicit more facts to support it. According to Crossley (2008), critical theory inquires into factors that negate realization of enlightened ideals among the working class. The theory challenges the obviousness and simplicity of the world around us and mores so, what an ordinary human is able to perceive through the power of reasoning and senses. As opposed to Bourdieu's theory, critical theory questions passive acceptance of the way things are or thought to be. As such, it inquires into problems and limitations common in the world we live in (Green, 1990). In addition, critical theory contradicts Bourdieu's theory that is limited to fewer areas of study since it does not select among disciplines and therefore occupies tenuous positions across all disciplines. In sum, critical theory helps in refinement and development of our capacity to engage others critically through challenging, questioning and contributing towards progressive transformation of the present status quo within the society. According to Cowen (2006), intersectionality refers to numerous relationships and overlaps between social categories that facilitate progression of inequality not only on the basis of adding some effects, but through combination of major effects. This element is evident in the present study where inequality in the UK education system is found to be facilitated by myriad factors. Ideally, there are significant drivers which are as a result of the economic set up which divides the society between half and half-nots. This form of economic set up is common with capitalist forms of economies that the UK is not an exception. In this vein, the rich are positioned to get the best not only in terms of education, but also in other areas of products and service provision. Bourdieu's theory of cultural reproduction is about class inequalities and educational achievement, Bourdieu debates about this in the theory (Sullivan, 2002). According to Sullivan (2002) Bourdieu’s theory focuses on cultural capital, the higher class play a part with the success in the education system, however coming from a low class background leads to failure and this suggests that there is class inequality. On the other hand Sullivan (2002) claims that Bourdieu’s theoretical framework suggests that educational qualifications reproduces social inequality and people that come from a high class background deserve their positions in the social structure. According to Bourdieu cited from Sullivan (2002) cultural capital depends on the social class, working class people face difficulties to achieve within the education system. Bourdieu suggests that the high class obtain educational achievements more than the working class and this is due to cultural capital (Sullivan et al, 2002). In addition Bourdieu suggests that “the education system has a key role in maintaining the status quo” (Sullivan, 2002, Pg 145). According to Bourdieu (1983/1986) cited from Lin (2001) capital is divided into three parts which are: cultural capital, social capital and economic capital. Social capital consists of the size of connections and the volume of these connections (Lin et al? 2001). Bourdieu’s perspective on social capital is that it is owned by members who belong to a social network – group (Lin et al, 2001). Bourdieu identifies that achievement in the education system is due to higher class habitus and cultural capital (Sullivan et al, 2002). Working class people do not possess a high class habitus or cultural capital (ref). Bourdieu claims that the dominant culture in society possesses cultural capital, cultural capital varies within social class and this is one of the reasons why the working-class are facing difficulties with achievement (Sullivan et al, 2002). Bourdieu believes that the middle-class possesses cultural capital and due to cultural capital they obtain higher educational credentials compared to the working-class which lack cultural capital (Sullivan et al, 2002). In addition Bourdieu claims that habitus consists of values, attitudes, achievement (success) and chances which is shared by class. According to Cole and Hill (2001) Bourdieu and Passeron analyse the relationship and link between education and cultural formation. Bourdieu suggests that the middle-class schools are specialized specifically for middle-class students (Cole and Hill et al, 2001). Cultural reproduction functions in three ways: firstly the formal curriculum and assessment meets the middle-class requirements and is an advantage to them due to cultural capital (Cole and Hill et al, 2001). Secondly the cultural reproduction theory has a link to the hidden curriculum which consists of: culture and behaviour of a successful child (Cole and Hill et al, 2001). Bourdieu's linguistic approach is linked to cultural capital, as I mentioned previously cultural capital in educational terms is when a student has a cultural background and habitus (Talbot, Atkinson, Atkinson, 2003). In addition schools create cultural capital and parents tend to send their children to a specific school in order to ensure that their children obtain their life chances (Talbot, Atkinson, Atkinson et al, 2003 ). Linguistic capital falls on the same line as cultural capital, students who have a high status, social and cultural capital develop linguistic capital and this is where they obtain their life chances (Talbot, Atkinson, Atkinson et al, 2003). There are schools which provide access to high status language which helps them with life chances and this is due to the language (Talbot, Atkinson, Atkinson et al, 2003). Last but not least when referring to the middle-class students who come from a middle-class family and attend private schools have a separate education system to those who come from a working-class family (Cole and Hill et al, 2001). Sullivan (2002) claims that Bourdieu’s theory needs to be backed up and supported empirically, Bourdieu needs to discuss how parental capital is inherited by their children and cultural capital is transformed into educational qualifications. Ideally, critical theory continues to cause evolution in terms of reproduction and transformations within the education system. Even with the advantage of habitus and capitals, the critical theory seeks to level the education opportunities by challenging the existing notions that place the middle class in favourable positions within the societal context. As such, it is becoming apparent that irrespective of habitus and capital advantage, the working class still have an opportunity of excelling in academics. This is because the UK education system irrespective of whether it is more inclined to the advantage of affluent also provides a chance for working class students to receive education. Nevertheless, the modern developments within the education sector continue to ensure that all students across the divide get an opportunity of being educated. Bowles and Gintis Correspondence Theory Althusser (1971) cited from Giroux (2001) used the ideology concept in order to present how schools play a role in protecting the working-class domination. On the other hand Bowles and Gintis (1976) cited from Giroux (2001) have the same ideology but with a different theoretical approach. The correspondence principle consists of structured norms, values and skills which describes classroom interactions in terms of capitalism (Giroux et al, 2001). Bowles and Gintis portray classroom social relations as a social process; this has a link to schools, work-forces and the social reproduction theory (Giroux et al, 2001). Exclusion On the other hand in relation to exclusion Cole and Hill (2001) identify three types of exclusion which are: formal child exclusion, self-exclusion (the child with a phobia from school) and exclusion which could take place covertly. This takes place through the hidden or formal curriculum, a child could be excluded and also groups of children (Cole and Hill et al, 2001). Conclusion Ideally, in the light of modern world, people continue to be segregated in terms of social groups which are facilitated by differences in cultural and economic capabilities. As noted from the present study, those people who are economically advantages exert power within the society. This fact is well supported by social cultural theories such as Bourdieu's and critical theory that asserts the advantage of cultural capitals and habitual as key to the academic excellence of middle class. However, the working class were found to perform minimally in academics which are attributable to inadequacy of both habitual and capital advantages. Even though, critical theory still pushes the UK government to level education for both poor and rich, it is apparent that the middle class who has sufficient resources continues to get quality education relative to the working class. This nature is attributable to the UK form of economy which is more inclined to capitalism. It can therefore deliberate that the UK education system is modelled to be exclusive where the richer ones can afford quality education as opposed to the less rich. References: Abbott, D., 2010. Sociology Revision - Methodology, Positivism and Interpretivism. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 14th December 2013] Attew, K., 2012. GCSE and equivalent attainment by pupil characteristics in England 2010/2011. [PDF] Available at: [Accessed 25th November 2013] BBC, 2013. Top GCSE grades increase for private school pupils. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 25th November 2013] Cole, M., Hill, D., 2001. Schooling and Equality: fact, concept and policy. Abingdon: RoutledgeFalmer Crossman, A., n.d. Critical Theory. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 12th December 2013] Crossman, A., n.d. Functionalist Theory. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 12th December 2013] Gibb, N., 2011. Academies see double the increase of other maintained schools at GCSE. [Online] Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/academies-see-double-the-increase-of-other-maintained-schools-at-gcse [Accessed 25th November 2013] Giroux, H., 2001. Theory and Resistance in Education. [e-book] Available at: [Accessed 12th December 2013] Lin, N., 2001. Social Capital: A Theory of Social Structure and Action. New York: Cambridge University Press Perry, E., Francis, B., 2010. The Social Class Gap for Educational Achievement: a review of the literature. [PDF] Available at: [Accessed 20th November 2013] Shepherd, J., Sedghi, A., Evans, L., 2012. GCSE results 2010/11 by ethnicity, free school meals and first language. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 25th November 2013] Shepherd, J., 2010. Social class affects white people’s exam results more than those of ethnic minorities – study. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 25th November 2013] Slattery, M., 2003. Key Ideas in Sociology. Cheltenham: Nelson Thornes Ltd Sullivan, A., 2002. Bourdieu and Education: How useful is Bourdieu’s theory for researchers? [PDF] Available at: http://www.cls.ioe.ac.uk/library-media%5Cdocuments%5CBOURDIEU%20NetherlandsJournal.pdf [Accessed 18th October 2013] Willis, J., 2007. Foundations of Qualitative Research: Interpretive and Critical Approaches. London: Sage Publications Cowen, R.,2006. Acting comparatively upon the educational world: Puzzles and possibilities. Oxford Review of Education, 32(5), pp. 561-573. Crossley, M., 2008. Bridging cultures and traditions for educational and international development: Comparative research, dialogue and difference. International Review of Education, 54 (9), pp. 319-336. Crossley, M., and Watson, K., 2011. Comparative and international education: Policy transfer, context sensitivity and professional development. In J. Furlong & M. Lawn (Eds.), Disciplines of education. Their role in the future of education research. London, England: Routledge. Green, A., 1990. Education and state formation: The rise of educational systems in England, France and the United States. London, England: Palgrave Macmillan. Inkeles, A., and Smith, D. H., 2005. Becoming modern: Individual change in developing societies. London, England: Heinemann. King, E. J. (1979). Education for uncertainty. London, England: Sage. Lauwerys, J. A., 1965. General education in a changing world. International Review of Education, 11(4), pp. 385-401. McLean, M., 2006. Educational traditions compared: Content, teaching and learning in industrialized countries. London, England: David Fulton. Muller, D. K., Ringer, F., and Simon, B., 2003. The rise of the modern educational system: Structural change and social reproduction 1870-1920. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Noah, H. J., 2004. Fast fish and loose fish in comparative education. Comparative Education Review, 18(3), pp. 341-347. Scheerens, J., and Bosker, R.., 2007. The foundations of educational effectiveness. Oxford, England: Pergamon. Welch, A. J., 2003. Class, culture and the state in comparative education: problems, perspectives and prospects. Comparative Education, 20(5), pp. 7-25. Read More