Perhaps then we need to look more closely at what being deprived materially and culturally does to a child and its family. Surely poverty within the home has a knock- on effect in terms of individual school performance? Heaton and Lawson (“Education and Training”) describe this in a very basic and clear fashion. They believed that lack of income (material deprivation) led to over crowded housing which led to lack of space for homework, thus leading to depressed school performances. From this the link between an individual’s material conditions of life and their relative academic performance is not difficult to establish. Even considered in the School Performance Tables of recent times, the relationship between the inner city/poor rural areas and low achievement is clear. As is the reverse relationship between affluent areas and high achievement.
Other factors to consider are, poor diet, leading to tiredness and lack of concentration etc. Recent research into the relationship between poor diet, malnutrition, poverty, and foetal development suggests there is a link between these things and the physical development of the brain. Just as there is a suggested link between cigarette smoking and alcohol consumption affecting foetal development during pregnancy. In addition to this in controlled experiments, children whose vitamin intake was increased, saw that their IQ scores also increased by a few percentage points.
Lack of school resources (books, computers etc) is another consequence to the child being unable to study within the home. The stigma of poverty, could possibly lead to behavioural problems and if the child is being bullied, this may result in the child playing truant. Also the need to work to bring money into the home. This leaves less time for homework, and the child is tired after working before/after school.
We also have to understand that working class people have a different culture from middle class people, and that working class people do less well in education. Melvin Kohn discovered that there are class differences in culture. He described middle class parents as desiring independence of mind and working class parents as valuing obedience. This also links to the idea introduced by Oscar Lewis who introduced the idea of poverty. He claimed that poor people developed distinct sub-cultural values to enable them to survive poverty, but this disadvantaged children in school. At an individual level, he believed that people grow to feel helpless and disempowered to change their circumstances. By the age of six or seven, children have absorbed the values of their culture eg. Afro-Caribbean’s do not put much emphasis on learning and achieving highly, but prefer instead to live life doing menial jobs and spending time with others members of their culture, and cannot take advantage of opportunities that may occur. In school if you are part of the minority i.e. one of only three black children in a class of thirty white pupils, you may feel isolated and unsupported by the teacher if she herself possesses the same cultural background as the majority of the class. This in turn could lead to low grades, and underachievement.
As well as material and cultural deprivation I found that there were other factors relating to a child’s educational progress. These are I believe linked in some way to the above. It has been noted that members of the working class place a lower value on education. They place less emphasis on formal education as a means to personal achievement, and they see less value in continuing school beyond the minimum leaving age. The working class also place a lower value on achieving higher occupational status. In evaluating jobs, “they emphasize stability, security and immediate economic benefits” and tend to reject the risks and investments involved in aiming for high-status occupations. Compared to the middle class people of this country, the working class believe that there is less opportunity for personal advancement. Working class jobs reach full earning capacity relatively quickly, but provide fewer promotional prospects and less income for investments. In addition to this they were less secure. Manual workers are more likely to be laid off or made redundant than white- collar workers. The absence of a career structure in many working -class jobs meant that individual effort had less chance of producing improvements in income, status and working conditions. If this is the out look and situation of parents on low income, what chance then to do their children stand of breaking the cycle?
In today’s society there are many ways in which we can help the children who come from deprived backgrounds, one new initiative is Sure Start, which is a government run programme which aims to achieve better outcomes for children, parents and communities of deprived backgrounds by; increasing the availability of childcare for all children. Improving health and emotional development for young children. Supporting parents as parents and in their aspirations towards employment. The Sure Start Unit is responsible for raising the quality of learning and development opportunities for children from birth to five years, and giving children the best possible start to their learning journey. This is to be achieved by, helping services development in disadvantaged areas, alongside financial help for parents to afford better childcare.
In conclusion then although not fully accepted, it does seem that material and cultural deprivation plays a significant part in a child’s educational progress. And with the help of such programmes as Sure Start, let’s hope that the future for these innocent children becomes a better place for them to thrive in.
REFERECES
Haralambos and Hloborn (2000) Sociology Themes and Perspectives, fifth addition, London: Harper Collins.
Microsoft (2001) Encarta Concise Dictionary, Student Addition, London: Bloomsbury.
(accessed 13/10/2004)
(accessed 05/11/2004)
Victoria Cox
Study Skills
Tutor: Lina Ghosh.
