Social Class & Educational Attainment
Social class can be defined as a hierarchy of social stratification where your position is dependent on your economic factors (O’Byrne, 2011). Often, people who are working class use the education system to gain social mobility, whereby the move up a social class and produce an achieved status. This is can be seen as a meritocracy, whereby hard work will be rewarded on the basis of merit.
On the other hand, there is a significant between social classes and educational attainment. In figure 2, in 2009-2010, figures show the difference between obtaining no more than 5 GCSEs as a boy on FSM. “Education authorities and educational researchers frequently use the number of children who are eligible for free school meals (FSM) as an indicator of poverty and social disadvantage” (Maguire et al, 2006, p.20). Matheson and Babb (2002) believe that parents on a low income may be the reason why some children’s attitude to doing homework is poor, as their parents are unable to help them. The contextual factor of a low income shows clear signs of how it can affect a pupil’s achievement, ability and attainment, as a result, having a negative impact on their attitude towards learning.
The consequences of this, is that pupils leaving education at the age of 16 with less than 5 GCSEs, could result in them being NEETs (Not in Education, Employment or Training) (Haringey, 2008). In Haringey, this is major problem, as the rates are above national average. This is evident in figure 3, as this is an issue in London itself.
When the New Labour government came into power in 1997, there were aims to reduce the social gap between working class and middle class. They called this Social Inclusion. Armstrong suggested that before the definition of inclusion, was involving SEN pupils, but for her, it means inclusive education concerns all learners, opportunities for all (Ward and Eden, 2009). With clear correlations between the attainment gap of eligible FSM and non-eligible FSM pupils and their GCSEs results, more opportunities were given to FSM to encourage them to continue on in education. The introduction of EMA (Education Maintenance Allowance) encouraged pupils to continue on in further education. However, this funding was cut because of the coalition government in 2010.
Labelling theory is a theory formed by Howard Becker (1928- ). Forms of labelling could have a good or bad effect on a student and their educational achievement. Negative labelling could lead to a negative self-concept. Being limited from resources and withheld from information can make a pupil adopt a self-fulfilling prophecy, accepting their label as ‘real’ (O’Byrne, 2011). Usually, those with more powerful statues or positions can impact on a and individuals identity. “What seems to not have changed is the almost unspoken acceptance of white, middle-class masculinity as the ideal …” (Reay, 2001, p.120). Therefore suggesting that teachers evaluated pupils against what they see as an ‘ideal pupil’ which is white and middles class. This could imply that ethnic pupils and working class pupils were furthest away from this ideal. As a result, being negatively labelled by a teacher can make pupils feel marginalised and then ‘become’ what they think is an outsider (Hargreaves, 1967).
On the other hand, there is a significant between social classes and educational attainment. In figure 2, in 2009-2010, figures show the difference between obtaining no more than 5 GCSEs as a boy on FSM. “Education authorities and educational researchers frequently use the number of children who are eligible for free school meals (FSM) as an indicator of poverty and social disadvantage” (Maguire et al, 2006, p.20). Matheson and Babb (2002) believe that parents on a low income may be the reason why some children’s attitude to doing homework is poor, as their parents are unable to help them. The contextual factor of a low income shows clear signs of how it can affect a pupil’s achievement, ability and attainment, as a result, having a negative impact on their attitude towards learning.
The consequences of this, is that pupils leaving education at the age of 16 with less than 5 GCSEs, could result in them being NEETs (Not in Education, Employment or Training) (Haringey, 2008). In Haringey, this is major problem, as the rates are above national average. This is evident in figure 3, as this is an issue in London itself.
When the New Labour government came into power in 1997, there were aims to reduce the social gap between working class and middle class. They called this Social Inclusion. Armstrong suggested that before the definition of inclusion, was involving SEN pupils, but for her, it means inclusive education concerns all learners, opportunities for all (Ward and Eden, 2009). With clear correlations between the attainment gap of eligible FSM and non-eligible FSM pupils and their GCSEs results, more opportunities were given to FSM to encourage them to continue on in education. The introduction of EMA (Education Maintenance Allowance) encouraged pupils to continue on in further education. However, this funding was cut because of the coalition government in 2010.
Labelling theory is a theory formed by Howard Becker (1928- ). Forms of labelling could have a good or bad effect on a student and their educational achievement. Negative labelling could lead to a negative self-concept. Being limited from resources and withheld from information can make a pupil adopt a self-fulfilling prophecy, accepting their label as ‘real’ (O’Byrne, 2011). Usually, those with more powerful statues or positions can impact on a and individuals identity. “What seems to not have changed is the almost unspoken acceptance of white, middle-class masculinity as the ideal …” (Reay, 2001, p.120). Therefore suggesting that teachers evaluated pupils against what they see as an ‘ideal pupil’ which is white and middles class. This could imply that ethnic pupils and working class pupils were furthest away from this ideal. As a result, being negatively labelled by a teacher can make pupils feel marginalised and then ‘become’ what they think is an outsider (Hargreaves, 1967).
![Picture](/uploads/2/6/7/1/26710109/6874292.png?651)