Bernstein also claims that schools are middle class institutions. He claims that teachers use a middle class language code (elaborated code). This consists of full sentences, explicit, grammatically correct detailed and varied vocabulary. This code allows middle class children an advantage because they use this code at home. Working class children use a restricted code which consists of slang, limited vocabulary, incorrect grammar and inferred and implied meanings. Working class children are then at a disadvantage because they have to learn a new language in order to succeed at school. Teachers often label children who use the restricted code as ‘thick’. Language and speech patterns produce an inequality of children in different social classes.
Bowles and Gintis claimed that school corresponds to the world of work. They felt there was a hidden curriculum. The middle class children tended to conform to the hidden curriculum because the values are the same as their own. The working class children tended to disobey the hidden curriculum. Bowles and Gintis claimed this was the reason why middle class children performed better at school that working class children.
Willis identified pro-school and anti-school subculture. Children who were in the pro-school subculture done as the teacher expected whereas children in the anti-school subculture based school on ‘having a laff’. Middle class children tended to be in the pro-school subculture and working class children tended to be in the anti-school subculture. Both social classes respond to schooling in their own ways because of their environment at home and what was expected of them.
Giroux claims that children are actively involved in shaping their own education. They draw upon their own cultures in ways to respond to schooling. Different classes try to influence the content and the processes of schooling. The nature of education is influenced by a continuing struggle between the social classes involved. Working class children often have responses that involve resistance to the school. Giroux claims that middle class children often do better because their responses correspond to the school. Therefore an inequality is produced between children of different social groups.
Labelling produces an inequality between children of different social classes. This is because teachers label students according to their academic ability and their appearance. For example if a child looks scruffy then they will be given a negative label immediately whereas if a child looks neatly dressed they will be given a positive label immediately. This is regardless of their ability. Middle class children are generally dressed smarter than working class children. So an inequality between different social classes is produced.
Rosenthal and Jacobson claim that teachers’ expectations can significantly affect a students performance. This is the self-fulfilling prophecy. Teachers base their expectations on how they have been labelled therefore an inequality has been produced between different social classes.
Neil Keddie claimed that teachers categorised children according to their social background. Middle class children were placed in ‘A streamers’ and working class children were placed in ‘C streamers’. The teachers denied social background affected social background but Keddie found that social background played a major part. This produces an inequality between social classes.
Overall there is a huge inequality between social classes that is produced through schools. A number of processes play a part in this. Overall it is shown that middle class children are at an advantage when it comes to school compared to working class children.
