Failure of Education System to Remove Class Differences in Educational Attainment - Term Paper Example

8th December Failure of Education system to remove differences in Educational Attainment Introduction “Education was the gateway to opportunity for me. It was the gateway for Michelle. And now more than ever it is the gateway to middle class life.” –President Barrack Obama. (Strauss 2) Whether you voted for the Democrats or the Republicans; everyone seems to be concerned education standards of our country. Equality of opportunity to education and the ability of education to remove inequalities on society has been the cornerstone of American nation. It has always been said that a college education and hard work were the key to financial and social success. There has been a grave national concern regarding the drop in SAT scores of American students. Many believe that Asians are moving ahead of us in education-they are producing more engineers, more doctors and more scientists. Thus it seems a matter of time before they will surpass us in economic growth too. Level of education is in fact considered to be the precursor of economic growth. It is the magical potion which removes inequalities in society. It gives hope to people. But is education really helpful in removing inequalities? A person’s economic success depends on the class he is born in or the level of education he has achieved? Is Barrack Obama the rule or the exception? Why has the educational system failed to remove class differences in educational attainment? These are some of the questions that I try to answer in this term paper. Statement of Problem “The reasons for the failure of education system to remove class differences in educational attainment.” Literature Review Emile Durkheim argues that education teaches person skills which are critical for him to survive in an industrial society. (Heald 173) These skills are not only the transmission of society’s norms and values but also specific skills which are necessary for future occupation of the individual. Thus according to Durkheim education equips a person with general values which make him homogenous to the rest of the society and also provides him with specific skills which provide the necessary diversity for social cooperation. (Heald 174).This is the general functional perspective on education i.e. education provides the child with norms and values of society and the skills required for the job market. Other functionalists such as Talcott Parsons and Kingsley Davis further refine this argument. Both of them say that education system works on the meritocracy principle (Heald 176) .Schools provide equality of opportunity to all and rewards the high achievers with economic benefits in the job market. The liberals have largely borrowed their view point from the functionalists. They believe that Education fosters personal development, self fulfillment and improves the child’s physical and mental health. (Darryl Gless 57) Education provides equality of opportunity and removes the class bias in the economic system. Liberals say that educational attainment raises income and the bargaining power of the working class. Most of the reforms in the educational system carried out in our nation have been based on these views. Most politicians have believed that the answer to all our national problems come down to a single word: education. As a result various special programs on education were part of President Johnson’s war on poverty. (Darryl Gless 68)However the war on poverty has ended - and it is increasingly clear that poverty seems to have won. Either education has failed to lift the masses out of poverty or the reforms have failed in their reach and approach. If what the functionalists and liberal claim is true- if education is the elixir which can pull a person out of poverty; the natural question which comes to mind is why the lower classes haven’t taken more to education? Why educational attainment does rises from the bottom to the top of the class system. (Darryl Gless 87)The SAT Program information statistics show that SAT scores increase as the household income increases. Another statistics of US department of commerce shows that in 2000 about 48.6% of children of working class were enrolled in college as compared to 78% children from middle classes. A number of attempts have been made to answer this question. The earlier theories which claimed that white children have a greater IQ as compared to black have now been thrown in the dustbin where they belong. It has now been proved beyond doubt that IQ depends on both nature and nurture and the difference in IQ between blacks and whites is due to nurture and not nature. One interesting theory put forward has been that of cultural deprivation. (Chapman 34)This theory says that working class students have a different culture as compared to middle class. This subculture of working class puts them at a disadvantage and thus they perform badly in schools and colleges. These cultural deprivation theories have been given by Barry Sugarman and Herbert H Hyman among others. Sugarman argues that differences in nature of jobs performed by middle class and working class accounts for different culture in households. (Chapman 98) As working class people have less control over their future, their jobs are boring, and they have limited chances of promotion so a culture of fatalism, present time orientation and collectivism develops among the working class. Fatalism involves acceptance of status quo, present time orientation means inability to defer gratification and collectivism means loyalty to the group rather than individual achievement. The cultural deprivation theory has been criticized by the proponents of situational constraint theory which says that poor share the norms and values of the mainstream society; the only difference being that they are not able to translate these values into reality. (Chapman 77)As the working class worker sees little chances of promotion so he becomes a fatalistic; no matter how hard he works –he cannot reach above a certain level.So why work hard?This leads to present time gratification-enjoying the present as everyone knows that future is going to be bad.And finally the labour class has long realised that as they are individually not important to the authorities- they need to work together.Collective action such as strikes are much more effective in getting pay rise than individual bargainning. Situational constraint theory has been given by Elliot Liebow. (Liebow 48)In our research, this is the first thing which we will try to analyze .Are the class differences in educational attainment due to cultural deprivation? Another interesting theory which has been propagated by B.Dougls has been that educational attainment is linked to the degree of parent’s interest in their children’s education. As middle class parent’s show more interest in the education of their children so they achieve more educational success than their working class counterparts. (Paterson 102) Middle class parents lay an emphasis on high achievement and motivate their children to perform better. Dougls claims that this effect is more pronounced during primary socialization. The behavior of high achievement which is instilled during the early childhood days stays with the child throughout his life and he excels in school. Do working class parents pay less attention to their child’s education and does it have any effect on the child? This is the second question that I try to answer in my research. As it will not be possible for me to conduct a temporal survey; I have relied on interviews only to answer this question Another interesting piece of literary work regarding differential class achievement has been done by Raymond Boudon. He says that inequality in educational achievement is a result of 2 component process. The first component which is referred by him as primary effects of stratification involves sub cultural differences between the classes. This is similar to the cultural deprivation theory. (Hamlin 98) The secondary effects of stratification which are pointed out by Boudon are interesting. This he calls as the positional theory. (Hamlin 93)Positional theory says that the very fact that people start from different positions in stratification system produces educational inequality. Thus if a middle class child pursues a blue collar job like being a mason, his choice would lead to social demotion. Whereas a working class child doing the job of a mason maybe socially promoted. Thus there is a great pressure on middle class children to go for higher education. This pressure is usually compounded by peer and family pressure. (Hamlin 103) Thus if a middle class child drops put after high school and does not go to college, he will be excluded from his friend circle most of whom would be attending colleges. The reverse holds true for a working class child. I will try to find out if positional theory can be proved through my research. Research Questions Thus on the basis of literature review; I will try to answer three question regarding class differences and educational attainment – 1) Are differences in cultures of middle class and working class responsible for differential educational attainment? 2) Do working class parents pay less attention to their child’s education and is this responsible for lower educational attainment levels? 3) Do middle class students achieve more educational success because of their class position? The answer to these questions will have different repercussions on the way we try to address these educational deficiencies. Methodology The research method which has been employed is interview (which consists of a mix of structured as well as unstructured questions) which was administered to 24 public school students of 8th grade. 16 of the students which were selected for the interview had parents who belonged to the working class and the remaining 8 belonged to middle class households. Working class parents are classified whose household income is less than US$ 30,000 .The interview which was administered consists of ten questions and has been included in Appendix A. The first 3 questions of my research have been targeted at the first research question. Through these questions I try to find out if there is a difference in cultures of middle class students and working class students. Question no 4, 5, 6 and 10 are targeted at research question no 3.These questions test the position theory hypothesis which has been given by Raymond Boudon. The rest of the questions are targeted towards research question no2 and try to find out the effect of parent’s attention on a child’s education. I have chosen a mix of questions with fixed responses and questions in which the respondent is free to say whatever he likes. This is because the third research questions that I have requires an elaborate conversation with the student .The answers to these questions also vary from one student to next and it is not possible to provide multiple choice or fixed answers to these questions. Any such attempt will be counterproductive and I may not get the correct responses. Interview was chosen as the medium of research as it is economical and easy to conduct. I am aware of the shortcoming of using interview as a methodology. The answers given in the interview by the respondents may have little resemblance to what they may actually do even if the respondents give honest answers. (Bryman 74)This happens because while doing a particular thing the respondent depends on his subconscious but while answering the questions he consciously tries to answer them.Some students may also have given dishonest answers if they did not want to show their parents or themselves in a bad light. Another shortcoming of interview is the interviewer bias. The result of an interview usually depends on the way results are analyzed and interpreted by the interviewer. As an interviewer has values, attitudes and expectations; so he may see the interviewee through colored glasses. The interviewer may also direct the responses of unstructured questions towards the answers that he wants to hear from the respondents. However as interviews are less costly and time consuming; therefore my preference for this method of research was obvious. Other methods such as Participant Observation were unfeasible because of the amount of time required for these methods. (Bryman 83) I have tried to as non-directive as possible while taking the interview and have tried to ensure that questions which are asked by me are understood properly by the respondents. But a small degree of bias cannot be ruled out in the interviews conducted. Also, the second research question i.e. the effect of parent’s attention on child’s education requires a temporal study in which the same child is observed over 8-10 years for proper results to emerge. However limitations of time does not allow me to conduct such research and thus interview questions have been used to seek responses. Results & Observations The results of the interview conducted is presented below – 1) 20 of the 24 students who were interviewed defined success as a big car, house and loads of money. It is interesting to note that this definition of success was endorsed by all the 16 working class students. The answer to this question shows that working class students have the same norms and values which are characteristics of middle-class America. Materialistic achievement was considered as important by all the students irrespective of the class to which they belonged thus nullifying the theory that working class students have different norms and values which are different from working class students. 2) The second question showed varied responses among the students and shows to the possibility of a mild subculture which is different from the mainstream culture. However the differences were not so acute for me to come to the conclusion that there was no influence of the mainstream culture on working class students. Response of middle class students – Thus the response of middle class students’ shows that majority of them believe that success can be achieved by them if they work hard and achieve a considerable degree of education. Here are the responses of the 16 working class students of the class. As we can see the responses of working class students differ significantly. A majority of them believe that success comes to people having a rich dad or those who are lucky. 3) The responses to the third question are interesting. A major component of working class subculture theory claim is present day gratification i.e. working class people live for the present and do not think about their future. So working class students should choose either the X-Box or the bike and middle class students should have chosen college education. Response of working class students – Response of middle class students – The responses of students belonging to both classes of students were similar. A very few opted for college education and majority opted for the X Box or the bike. Thus all the students of that age responded in a similar manner and the much touted present time orientation of working class students and the inability to delay gratification was visible even among the middle class students. Question 4, 5, 6 and 10 need to be analyzed together. These questions were intentionally left with no fixed responses so that the student can freely express his views. The common thing which can be analyzed from the interview was that 95% of the students interviewed wanted better jobs than their father’s job. This improvement in job was seen in economic terms by most of the students. They wanted to have more income that their parents. The quantum of increase that they wanted however varied among the students. This was because they considered their parent’s income as the base on which they had to improve upon. Questions 7, 8 and 9 were an attempt to gauge the level of participation of the parents in the education of the child. There was a clear indication in these questions that middle class parents were more concerned about their child’s education as compared to working class parents. All the middle class students said that their grades were checked regularly by their parents and low grades resulted in grounding or scolding. Their parents also took the help of friends, provided private tuitions and even made frequent contact with the teachers to ensure that their child progresses well in the school. Working class parents on the contrary were less interested in checking their children’s grades and took little interest in improving their grades. Analysis After presenting the results of the interview conducted above, I will analyze them and try to find out the answers to the three research questions that I had asked in the beginning of the paper. The first thing which I analyzed was whether there was any difference is the cultures of the working class and the middle class students. If there does exist some differences then the programs which were targeted at removing the cultural deprivation of working class students such as Operation Head Start were targeted in the right direction although the program themselves were a complete failure. If I analyze the responses to question 1 and 2 together; I find that the working class students have absorbed the mainstream cultural goals but have not accepted the institutionalized means to achieve those goals. This conclusion is similar to the theory given by Robert K Merton regarding social structure and anomie. (Heald 413) However rejection of institutionalized means of achievement such as education and hard work do not represent a different culture but they represent a frustration at the means which have been given to them for achieving those goals. This means that the education system has failed the working class; it has not allowed them to study, work hard and become rich. The working classes do not have a different subculture which needs to be addresses through special programs but special programs need to target our country’s educational system which seems to favor the rich and middle class students. The second research question shows that middle class parents do indeed pay greater attention to their children as compared to working class parents. However no attempt to remove this bias can be successful as it is a class thing and cannot be solved by asking the parents to be more attentive. It is a part of their nature and cannot be enforced. One of the alternatives suggested is that teachers should pay more attention to these students if parents cannot. However it has been shown through various researches that teachers cannot replace parents. Children are much more affected by their parent’s behavior as compared to the behavior of their teacher. The third question which I asked was whether middle class students were more prone to success due to their class positions. The result of the study shows that middle class students were more prone to success because their base position was higher as compared to working class students. The son of a software engineer will settle for nothing less than a white collar job; whereas the son of a house help was ready to serve in the army. Thus there is a strong support to the position theory which has been forwarded by Boudon. If on the basis of this research I consider class position of parents to be the starting point and the base on which the children are going to work on; this has grave consequences for our quest to provide equitable education for all. Till the time classes are present in the society, there will be no chance of equitable educational attainment as there will always be the influence of class in which a child is born. Thus the only alternative which can solve this problem is the Marxian perspective. Marxist considers education system as a part of the superstructure. Superstructure originates from the economic infrastructure of the society. Louis Althusser and Samuel Bowles propagate this perspective and say that the only purpose of education is the reproduction of labor power (Heald).Education makes the students used to the inequalities in society. The meritocratic principle on which education system claims to work is regarded as a myth by the Marxists which are propagated by the ruling class. This theory is supported by a research conducted by Howard Becker which shows that the ‘ideal pupil’ on the basis of whom all the students are evaluated by teachers is a middle class white male student. On the basis of comparison with this ‘ideal pupil’ the black students are always found wanting. Michael F.D Young argues that those in position of power – that is the middle class and the upper class define what knowledge is. (Heald 217) They tend to define their own knowledge as superior, institutionalize it and measure educational attainment in terms of it. As middle class and upper class students are already aware of this knowledge on the basis of their birth in this class; they have an upper hand in education as compared to working class students who have to learn things which are alien to them. This follows that to destroy the inequalities in educational attainment we need to destroy classes, create a communal society which will then provide equal educational equality for all. Conclusion On the basis of the research which has been carried out; I can make three conclusions- 1) There does not seem to be a different subculture of the working class. The goals which they want to achieve are similar to the goals of middle class students. 2) Middle class parents do give more attention to the education of their children as compared to working class parents. 3) The level of educational attainment depends on the class in which a person is born in to. Thus the above research provides an insight into the reasons due to which educational system has failed to bridge the class divide. The efforts till now have been to modify the educational system to make it more inclusive; to give more opportunities to the weaker section. However the problem is not opportunities provided but the problem it seems is the class system itself. Till the time class system exists; differential educational attainment will be a reality which cannot be wished away. Further Research Having established the fact that class differentials are responsible for differential class achievements of various students – the next obvious research which can be conducted is to check how the students fare when class is removed from the picture. This research cannot be conducted in USA because of the capitalist system of economy which inevitably produces different classes of people. However there exists one society which provides the opportunity of such type of research – the Israeli Kibbutz. Israeli Kibbutz works on the Marxist principle – “from each according to his ability to each according to his needs”. Upper , middle and working class as we know is USA does not exist in the Kibbutz. The effect of attention given by parent’s on child’s education is also nullified as parents are not responsible for the upbringing of a child in the Kibbutz. This role is done by specialists. The parents meet their children for only a few hours daily. It will be interesting to see the educational performance of students there. Do they compete on merit alone or there are some other extraneous factors which come into play? The answer to this question may provide us with an alternative to the biased education system of our country. Appendix A 1) What do you think is meant by success? Success means a big car, big house and a lot of money. Success is peace of mind Success means satisfaction with your chosen career path. 2) What are the means of achieving success in life? Hard work Education A Rich Dad Depends on luck of the person 3) Please select from the following what you would like to have if we were to give it for free? A College Education Latest version of Xbox Your favourite Bike 4) What is the occupation of you mother and father? 5) Would you like to follow your father’s footsteps in the same occupation? 6) What kind of job would you prefer to do? 7) Do your parents check your grade regularly? Yes, always No, Never Sometimes 8) What is their reaction if you achieve low grades? I am grounded I am scolded They are indifferent 9) How do your parents help you to achieve better grades? 10) What do your parents expect to become in life? Works Cited Bryman, Alan. Social Research Methods. London: Oxford University Press, 2012. Chapman, Karen. The Sociology of Schools. New York: Routledge, 1986. Darryl Gless, Barbara Herrnstein Smith. The Politics of Liberal Education. New York: Duke University Press, 1991. Hamlin, Cynthia Lins. Beyond Relativism: Raymond Boudon, Cognitive Rationality, and Critical Realism. New York: Routledge, 2002. Heald, M Haralambos and R M. Sociology- Themes and perspective. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2012. Liebow, Elliot. Tally's Corner: A Study of Negro Streetcorner Men. Washington D.C.: Rowman & Littlefield, 2003. Paterson, Douglas B. Education, employment, and income: incipient economic stratification in land-scarce Bunyore. New York: Institute for Development Studies, University of Nairobi, 1980. Strauss, Valerie. what Obama said about Education in Speech. 06 09 2012. 08 12 2012 . Read More