Class differences in educational attainment.

pass this onto the child. The child will therefore not see the point in going to school and their parents may not take much interest or encourage their child to do well. Therefore the child will not have the desire to work in school and are likely to follow in their parents footsteps.          Secondly child that have grown up in poverty tend to speak in restricted language code. They are context-bound and assume that the listener knows what they are talking about and are not clear.  Therefore they do not fully understand what the teacher is saying because the teacher is likely to be speaking in elaborated (context-free), which is not what a child experiencing poverty is used to hearing.          Childhood poverty usually leads to material deprivation. The parents do not have the money to buy resources, pay for private tuition or send the child on school trips. All three of these help a child do better in education because they can learn more from visiting a place, or getting extra help from a book or second tutor. Due to lack of money the child may also live in a crowded home where it is too noisy for them to do homework. If this is the case they may have the desire to work hard and do well but they cannot because they have not got to peace and quiet or time to do it in.      Teachers also negatively label students from a deprived background and judge pupils on their ability or intelligence. They then put the student into ‘sets’ and most often in the lower sets are those from a deprived background. By doing this the teacher has shown that they don’t believe the students will do that well, putting into the students head that there is no point in trying because they won’t gain anything from working hard. The lower sets are usually just taught the ‘easy’ topics and they don’t see the harder material. Therefore they can only do what they are taught meaning that they cannot do as well as others because they have not been taught how to do what they can.      Finally they have a subculture with different goals, values and beliefs to others. As part of this culture they are fatalist and do not see the point in trying if they aren’t going to achieve – this could be down to negative labelling. They may also take the collectivist value and feel like they have to support each other, so instead of concentrating on their own studies they take it upon themselves to help others. They also want immediate gratification and present time orientation. This means that they don’t want to work hard and wait for a reward, they want it know and that they only live for the present and fail to see that what they do now will affect their future.Both internal (factors within schools) and external (factors outside of schools) play a part in the difference in attainment between social classes.          One internal factor that has a major impact on working class children is labelling. Instead of judging children by their ability and intelligence they judge them on their social class and background. Becker explains that teachers have an ‘ideal pupil’, a pupil that has middle class characteristics such as obedience and conformity. Therefore anyone that does not fall into this category is ‘labelled’ and treated differently.  This can then lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy. The teachers have judged the children and labelled those who are not middle class as failures or not going to do well. Because of this and the different treatment they receive, the working class children start to believe that they will not achieve. Thus meaning that they do not want to work hard and don’t see the point in achieving so will fail. What the teacher expected happens.          However it is not just this that causes the child to fail. The working class have a sub-culture that is different from the ‘right’ dominant white/middle class of Britain. They do not have the same values which lead to them behaving differently and being negatively labelled. The working class subculture has four key parts: fatalism, the belief that there is no point in trying if you aren’t going to succeed; collectivism, everyone should support each other and work together; immediate gratification, an ‘I want it now’ and present time orientation, living for the present not the future. All of these mean that the child does not want o work hard in school because they don’t see the point, they don’t want to wait for a reward and don’t see why they should have to work hard for 5 years in order to obtain GCSE results. They fail to see how what they do now will influence their future so don’t bother doing anything and think that their future will be fine. This subculture and different beliefs and values lead to the teachers negatively labelling them. Therefore the external factor in this case determines how the child is treated in school. If the child had the same beliefs and values as a middle class child but had less wealth they would be treated the same and are more likely to achieve. The internal factor is not the key to determining how successful a child will be but their home life is.          Alongside this is streaming. Balls study showed that teachers put students into three bands, those that are warm to education, those that are a bit cooler and those that are underachieved. Because of this children from a working class background end up in a lower band. In the lower bands the students are only taught the basic, simpler things that will get them a grade in their GCSE’s. However because of streaming they are not pushed and are not taught the harder, more complex things that will enable them to achieve higher grades. Also being in a low band dissuades the child to learn. They see themselves as being put in the low band because they can’t do what the others can and choose not to learn and work.     However it is arguable that the parent’s attitude and education contributes to the child not being pushed further. Douglas found that working class parents are less ambitious and do not have high dreams and hopes for their child. Because of this they take less of an interest in their child’s education and do not encourage them to push themselves or to learn. The parents are also likely to not have had much of an education themselves so they won’t have the knowledge that they need in order to help their child with their studies. Both of these give the child less chance of succeeding in education because they don’t get the help and support they need from their parents. Also what they see in their parents is what will become their norms and values, therefore they will choose not to learn in school because they want to be like their parents who they see as doing fine. Therefore it is arguable that what happened at home influences the bands that the child is put in. Therefore it is an external factor that causes the underachievement and not the fact that they are internal judged and banded.     The curriculum also leads to the working class not doing as well as others. The information and subjects taught in schools are aimed at the upper classes and not working class children. For example during a geography lesson the teacher may talk about a famous seaside town that he would expect the entire class to know about. But due to external factors a working class child may not have been there. This causes problems because the student does not know what the teacher is talking about and may switch off. For several reasons working class children have not had the same experiences or have been to the same places as middle class children so they will find it harder to relate to what is being spoken about in lessons. Thus leading to them not being able to achieve as highly as middle class students who have had all the experiences.     However it is not the curriculum that causes these problems, it is the lack of material things. Woking class families are likely to experience material deprivation. This means that the child’s parents are not able to afford extras to aid the child’s education, such as tutors, books and school trips. The child may then fall behind because they have missed out on something that all the other children in their class have had. For example there may be a school trip to a museum that a working class family cannot afford to send their child on. In future lessons the teacher may refer to something seen on that trip so the child that didn’t get to go will be lost and won’t know what they teacher is saying whereas the other students will. Because of this we cannot blame the curriculum for the underachievement in working class pupils, it offers some of the experiences needed for education but the material deprivation means that the child cannot experience it. On the other hand a lot of schools offer help and support to the children from a working class background who cannot afford a lot, and help financially with the cost of a trip. Therefore you could say that it is not the curriculum or material deprivation that causes the child to underachieve.          Overall internal factors have an impact of the achievement of working class students. However these internal factors are caused by the external. Therefore it is arguable that they would have little effect if the external factors were taken away. Thus meaning that they external factors are the greatest influence on social-class differences in educational achievement.