Working-class children are less successful in the education system. Sociologists have explained this by the facts that, the home background is often not as helpful for educational success as that of the middle class; the neighbourhood may also weaken the chances of the working-class child. Also if a pupil has a poor diet it means the pupils are less healthy. Therefore this affects attendance as they will become ill more and may underachieve. Most people assume working class children have the poorer diets. Also income can affect achievement. Working class pupils do not have as much money therefore they may not be able to afford books or go on trips. The child is then at a disadvantage. The size of a family can also be a problem. Sometimes there is not enough space in the house to do homework. Also the quality of the home can affect achievement. If a pupil has a damp home they can get ill and therefore this affects attendance.
When social class is investigated in relation to educational attainment, research carried out by sociologist King (1) (1970) reveals that a child's educational success is related closely to their home background and the social class group to that of the parents. Most socialists would agree with King in the view that the higher a child's parents are in the social class structure the greater that child's chances of educational success. Therefore it is assumed that the children of working class parents do not accomplish as much academically as the children of middle class parents. Socioglists suggest a variety of reasons for the relative educational "failure" of the working class. These reasons are the influence of the home, the neigbourhood/peer group. Along side these explanations is also the issue of intelligence/IQ. Psychologist H Eysenck (1971) would argue that the reason for the difference in educational attainment is that of innate intelligence, the fact that individuals inherit their intelligence/IQ from their parents in much the same way that a person would inherit their facial expressions. Eysneck states "what children take out of schools is proportional to what they bring into the schools in terms of IO."(2). Other sociologists would disagree and argue, what is deemed intelligent varies from society to society, IQ scores vary over time and can improve with practice, and also that IQ tests are biased in favour of the middle class as these tests are largely conducted and carried out by members of the middle class group. Therefore IQ tests only measure the ability of the individual who is being tested to conform to the testers personal idea of intelligence. Most sociologists would largely agree that although we inherit a degree of mental intelligence from our parents, our culture and upbringing determine most of our intelligence.
When looking at the role of the home in relation to educational attainment sociologists examine the values and behaviour of the parents, the form of language used in the home and the physical condition of the home. Douglas (3) (1964) places particular emphasis on the parent's attitude - how much value and the degree of interest showed towards their child's education. Douglas argues that the lack of interest or failure to encourage by parents is significant factors in poor educational performance of their child. From his conclusions, Douglas stated that that during primary socialization, middle-class children received greater attention and stimulus from their parents and that this " formed the basis for high achievement in the educational system". The National Children's Bureau (4) carried out a study based on a nationwide survey of children born in a particular week of March 1946. They monitored this particular group of children and followed their progress through out their entire school days. Just like Douglas it was concluded that middle class parents appeared to show more interest in their children's education than what working class parents did. Further investigations suggest that the reasons behind this division in interest shown by the classes are that middle class parents are more aware of the importance of education. Also that they are usually in a better position to encourage and advise as they are well educated themselves and can offer assistance in homework etc. Some sociologists link this directly to the reason why the middle class children achieve more academically. However these views are strongly criticized by sociologists Tessa Blackstone and Jo Mortimore (5) (1994). They argue that working class parents are not nessarily less interested in their children's education. Blackstone and Mortimore make the following points, working class parents have less time than middle-class parents to attend to school matters because of the demands of their jobs. Working class parents can be put off going to the school because of the way teachers interact with them. Some sociologists argue that if the points made by Douglas, Blackstone and Mortimore are all taken into account, then it may be true (although it is far from being established) that there are clear variations in the attitudes and behavior between the middle classes and working classes, and that this in turn has a lasting effect upon educational attainment. However Howard Becker(6) (1971) has challenged this, his main point is that behavior can change radically depending on the situation. He states "that human action is not simply an expression of fixed patterns established during childhood" therefore parental values are not the reasons for differences in attainment between the social classes. Some sociologists criticize Becker for failing to explore what are the reasons for differential education attainment. Basil Bernstein(7) (1971) looks at speech patterns in relation to social class differences and how this can impact upon educational attainment. He points out "in order to benefit from an academic education, a wider vocabulary and an ability to communicate clearly and cogently are crucial." Bernstein argues that parents pass on vocabulary and ability with language to their children. The more clearly parents reply to children's questions and explain things to them, the better the children will be in their use of language. Berstein distinguishes between two codes of speech; elaborated and restricted (8). From his study he concluded that elaborated speech is most often found to be practiced in middle class homes; a wide vocabulary is used with the child and he/she is encouraged to fully explore.
In conclusion I believe that school factors are important to explain class difference in achievement. However I do not think they give the full picture. To get this we need to take into account the factors outside of school. We can then see what affects achievement.
