The previous sections you’ve looked at have focused on material and cultural factors (factors outside school) affecting a child’s ability to get 5 good GCSEs at school. Now we’re going to examine factors inside school which affect at child’s ability to get 5 good GCSEs.
This perspective is known as an interactionist perspective, because the sociologists who conducted this research used the principles of symbolic interactionism (social theory) along with interpretivist research methods to create their findings. These methods include, observations (covert and overt); open-ended interviews; open-ended questionnaires.
Schools have been the subject of much continuing controversy about their purposes, responsibilities and effects on young people. It has been estimated that young people spend close to half their waking hours in school and inevitably their experience of school has the potential for positive and negative impact on later life.
So do schools make a difference?
Major early research raised doubts about whether education even made a difference. It was argued that the differences found between schools academic achievements were due to differences in the social class, family and other social conditions of the students (that is material and cultural factors we’ve just been looking at).
In a landmark study in 1979, Michael Rutter conducted research in a selection of comprehensive schools 
titled Fifteen Thousand Hours – Secondary Schools and their Effects on Children identified substantial differences between secondary schools in a range of student academic and behavioural outcomes. He found the better the school the better a child’s level of attainment irrespective of cultural and material factors. His findings are summarised as follows Rutter’s research
As we can see the better the school environment, the better the chances of a child doing well. Recent ressearch has shown the effect of social-class on attainment at school is as important as ever. Read here. Other research suggests that that what goes on in the classroom has a major impact on a child doing well at school to the extent they are more important than the immediate effects of material and cultural factors mentioned earlier.
by Sam Cook a former student
Income is often seen as a key factor in determining what category of social-class a person or family falls into; the
lower the income, the lower a person’s social-class. Sociologists have tried to account for the social-class differences in educational achievement because in the UK all the data suggests the higher your social-class the greater your achievement at school is likely to be.
Now might be a good time to look at another type of school children in Engalnd and Wales can attend, these are fee-paying or independent schools (sometimes known as private schools). The parents of the children who attend these schools pay a fee to attend these schools (the state sector is funded by income tax payments, so your parents don’t directly pay to send you to school.
Children who attend independent schools tend to get better GCSE and A Level results than state school children. This BBC Newsnight video helps explain why that is. Play video. You can read more about Wellington Public School here and here along with the Headteacher of Wellington Public School being critical of the gulf between the state an private sector.
Now watch this clip about life at Eton College which is world famous independent school where there A Level results are exceptional or this link Too Posh for Poor School.
The next sections will focus on the three key areas which help explain the relationship between social-class and attainment at school (state schools) caused either by factors inside school or factors outside school (or a combination of both).
Factors outside school
Material explanations – these focus on the role of income and the advantages money provides in assisting a child achieve at school
Cultural explanations – these focus on the different lifestyles between the social classes such as, norms, values, socialisation, expectations, subcultures, language etc and their impact on attainment
Factors within schools
Factors inside school otherwise known as the interactionist perspective. This is because they focus on the interaction between schools, teachers and pupils and the effects these have on:
Following on from subcultural differences is linguistic deprivation (how people speak). Linguistic deprivation is another aspect of cultural deprivation theory as it forms a part of a child’s upbringing and can have a significant 
impact on their attainment at school.
Bernstein looked at the role of language and its affects in educational success. Bernstein argued there are two types of language use, what he termed elaborated and restricted codes.
Bernstein stressed how the language used in schools is mainly that of the elaborated code which is used by the middle-classes. This Bernstein argued gives middle-class children an advantage as class-discussions, writing essays and understanding text books requires confident use of the elaborated codes, and middle-class children will be more familiar using the elaborated codes than working-class children.
Bernstein’s work as you can read below has been criticised
Revision-notes version
The concept of cultural advantage was developed further by Bourdieu (1971). He was a French Marxist who saw the culture of school as one which benefits middle-class children. In the same way subcultural theorists above talked about the different expectations of working and middle-classes. Bourdieu argued that each social class has its own ‘habitus’ or put very simply their unique habits.
For Bourdieu the middle and upper-class ‘habitus’ was to be socialised to identify with listening to classical music, reading quality books and newspapers and watching and discussing intellectual television programmes. By doing this Bourdieu argued the middle and upper social-classes acquired what he termed cultural capital (they gained more culture from all the books, music, and intellectual discussions they had at home with their parents).
And this cultural capital helped the middle and upper-classes at school because schools are run by the middle and upper-classes. Therefore schools are set up to recognise the cultural values of the middle-classes rather than the working-classes. And possession of cultural capital significantly improves a child’s chances because teachers and schools prefer people with middle-class values. So these children are encouraged while the working-classes are discouraged or placed into lower status schools.
Now we’ll move onto the final aspect of cultural influences by looking at ‘speech codes’.
In 1964 Douglas conducted research which looked at the impact of income on attainment at school. He identified that material and cultural factors affected a child’s ability to achieve at school. Material factors include poverty, 
diet, health and housing, while cultural factors include the values, attitudes and language.
The following presentation identifies all the material disadvantages uncovered by Douglas’ research.
A more recent piece of research by Lisa Harker (2006) also found a relationship between poor-quality housing and low attainment at school. Harker’s research found:
- Less space to play meant a restricted a child’s cognitive development
- There was less space to study
- Increased likelihood of being bullied at school which increased truancy rates
- Higher stress levels of the parents, leading to less support
Martha Farah (2006) researched the impact of socio-economic status on cognitive development and found that poverty had a direct impact on the development of a child’s brain which ultimately affected their attainment at school.
Furthermore the Sutton Trust (2005) found a direct relationship between free school meals and attainment. Leading state schools had had around 3% of their intake eligible for free school meals, whereas the majority of schools had 14.5% of their intake eligible for free school meals.
In 2014 The Guardian reported on the extent to which poverty is increasing the inequality between schools; particularly the growing gulf between children from low- and high-income families is starker than ever, leading to social isolation and bullying.
Douglas also found cultural factors played an important part in a child’s attainment at school. He particularly found that middle-class parents’ attitudes to education played a significant role in a child’s attainment at school because they were better at…..
A parents’ level of education also plays a major role in a child’s attainment at school. The higher a parents’ level of education the better they are at……
The influences of your cultural socialisation are explained further in the next page.
The problems with any form of selection there will always be winners and losers. Yet the 11+ examination is seen by some people as a useful way of identifying who will be the more able person in later life.
TASK – Identify as many problems as you can with 11+ selection. Once you’ve done that compare your findings with mine in the presentation below.
Similarly there are still numerous problems caused by the 1988 Education Act. Many of these problems might not be as apparent as those with the 11+ selection process.
TASK – Try and identify as many problems that came from the marketisation of education. Once you’ve done that compare your findings with mine in the presentation below.
As you found the selection process with the 1988 Education Act was an unintended consequence of the Act. However there still remain more visible forms of selection within the education system and this is known as a school’s admissions policy.
Admissions policies decide which school a child goes to. They are based on:
Ability – We have already looked at admissions policy by ‘ability’ this is through entrance exams like the 11+ which benefits the middle-classes
Religion – some schools like St Peters select on the basis of parents’ religious faith. Unfortunately faith criteria can disguise discrimination. For example the middle-classes tend to have a stronger affinity to adopting a faith.
Catchment area – as we’ve already seen the middle-classes are more able to move house into a better catchment area. This is sometimes known as ‘school selection by mortgage’
Parental choice – by getting parents to drive-up standards by sending their children to better schools, this has distorted admissions procedures as the middle-classes all congregate around the better schools at the expense of the working-classes.
To conclude what is evident, is any admissions procedure is fraught with problems as the middle-classes make certain they benefit most which is evident in this clip and this one
by Sam Cook a former student
The problem with the tripartite system was the 11+ exam was seen as unfair and inaccurate. The test was clumsy as it couldn’t predict a child’s intellectual development, moreover it disadvantaged children from working-class homes who couldn’t afford any additional tutoring or went to a primary school which wasn’t so committed to feeding
grammar schools.
Therefore the children who tended to go to grammar schools were middle-class to upper/middle-class, while lower middle/working-class tended to go to secondary modern schools (very view technical schools were ever built) as well as this problem other criticisms of the tripartite system were identified.
Because the process of selection was constructed by social-class as opposed to ‘pure’ intellectual ability the newly elected Labour government of 1965 starting reorganising secondary education by encouraging the growth of a comprehensive school system.
When the Labour Party was defeated in 1970 around 30% of schools were comprehensive by the end of that decade around 80% of secondary schools were comprehensive like Twynham and Highcliffe School.
However some local authorities still kept the selection process such as Bournemouth – (this means children in this area sit an 11+ test for the grammar school. If you don’t sit the test or you fail it you go to a secondary modern school like 
Avonbourne or Porchester). To-date there still remains 165 grammar schools in England and Wales.
The idea of comprehensive schools is there is no selection, in contrast the 11+ is a selection test, meaning pupils of all abilities can attend a comprehensive school. The only restrictions are one of where you live; you need to be in a particular catchment area in order to attend a particular school.
The strengths and weaknesses of a comprehensive education are explored on this page.
Though the comprehensive system addressed many parents’ concerns, some parents still didn’t like the idea of being told which school their child should go to especially if it was described as a ‘bog standard’ comprehensive. However this idea of parents being ‘told’ which school their children must attend was addressed by the Conservative government’s 1988 Education Act. This act created a new social policy designed by the New Right. What the 1988 Education Act introduced is explained in greater detail below:
The Act meant parents were now free to ‘shop’ around for the best school. Like consumers shop around for the best pair of jeans, parents could now shop around to seek out the best school for their child. The reason parents’ might prefer to shop around for the best state school for their child is because there is a wide difference in what a child achieves in one school compared with another in the same area. To get a better understand of what I mean, 
read this BBC article here.
In the same way when you shop you look out for market signals. Market signals are things like price, reputation, quality and reliability of product. So in order to create some market signals on schools the Conservative government of the period introduced Ofsted who would inspect schools for quality and reliability; while at the same time exam data would be made available to schools could be ranked on performance.
Parents could now read Ofsted reports and compare exam results in the form of league tables and send their child to the ‘best’ school. By getting schools to compete with each other so they could move up the league tables, the government thought this competition would improve results and school standards would rise. This has become known as the marketisation of the education system because parents are free to ‘shop’ using exam results, Ofsted reports and league table positions to find out which is the best school to send their child to.
The outcome of this was middle-class parents were more inclined to understand Ofsted reports and study league table information. Combine this with the fact middle-class parents have higher incomes and so were
able to move into the catchment areas of the good schools and you create what is termed as the post-code lottery. This is where some people are able to use the marketisation of the education system to their advantage.
schools were untouched by this process.The decision to which secondary school you would go to after primary school (year 6) was finished was not made by the student but by the ability to pass the 11+ exam. The 11+ exam is an IQ test which is seen to measure an individual’s current and future intellectual capacity. Those children who passed the exam went to grammar schools while those that failed went to either a secondary modern school or a secondary technical school.
Is your IQ fixed or malleable?
Do you believe your intelligence is determined by your genes and is therefore fixed. Or do you believe it is malleable by the learning environment you are placed in? This is known as the nature nurture debate and is fundamental throughout the education module. For example you have just looked at the tripartite system. This system selected a child’s educational path on the basis intelligence is static. Further into the module you will see other forms 
of ‘selection’ based on a child’s home and school environment.
Why this is important is recent studies have shown that where children are taught to believe their potential is limitless their level of educational attainment rose significantly. You can read more on this here
Task – have ago at an 11+ test and see if you would pass it!
What social problems can anticipate developing from the 11+ test selecting children? For more information read this piece , watch this and this . For further reading on the Tripartite System go here
Task 2 – please follow the link and answer all 6 questions
What is the hidden curriculum? – as well as the formal curriculum (maths, English, PE etc) schools also teach norms and values to their students – this is known as the hidden curriculum.
Examples of norms and values we’re taught are being punctual to lessons, dressing smartly in school uniform, working hard to achieve your best and receiving rewards for those efforts . It’s called the hidden curriculum because you don’t have formal timetabled lessons on dressing smartly, instead your teachers constantly remind you to be punctual or ‘tuck your shirt in’. You also learn respect for authority and following instructions
It is important to recognise that Functionalists appreciate the virtues of the hidden curriculum as being good at secondary socialising students to:
- look smart via the school uniform
- punctuality through disciplining people who are late
- shows children how to follow instructions
- as well how to read and follow a timetable
- and the benefits of working hard and doing additional work at home (homework)
In contrast Marxists like Bowles and Ginitis argue that the hidden curriculum is just an instrument or tool to prepare children for the workplace, hence their term ‘long shadow of work’. They see the hidden curriculum as:
- school rules, detentions and rewards teach people to conform to society whether you like it or not!
- school assemblies teach respect for dominant ideas
- boys and girls to accept different roles in society with boys learning to be masculine and girls feminine
- to follow teachers’ instructions without question in the same way you have to follow a bosses orders
- being punctual as your time belongs to your teacher/school and not you. This again replicates the way a future boss owns your time and so you’re being prepared for the world of work!
by Sam Cook a former student
From the 1960s onwards, feminist sociologists highlighted the following gender inequalities in society. Feminists argue that the education system is just a primary preparation for leading into the future work force. They argue the gender differences in subject choice in schools come is evidence of a patriarchal society. Colley (1998) reviewed this idea and found that despite all the social changes in recent decades, traditional definitions of masculinity and femininity were still widespread as evident below.
Gender and education – Feminist perspectives focus on gender inequalities in society. Feminist research has revealed the extent of male domination and the ways in which male supremacy has been maintained. From a feminist viewpoint, one of the main roles of education has been to maintain gender inequality.
Gendered language – reflecting wider society, school textbooks (and teachers) tend to use gendered language – ‘he’, ‘him’, ‘his’, ‘man’ and ‘men’ when referring to a person or people. This tends to downgrade women and make them invisible.
Gendered roles – school textbooks have tended to present males and females in traditional gender roles – for example, women as mothers and housewives. This is particularly evident in reading schemes from the 1960s and 1970s.
Gender stereotypes – reading schemes have also tended to present traditional gender stereotypes. For example an analysis of six reading schemes from the 1960s and 1970s found that:
- boys are presented as more adventurous than girls
- as physically stronger
- as having more choices
- girls are presented as more caring than boys
- as more interested in domestic matters
- as followers rather than leaders
Women in the curriculum – in terms of what’s taught in schools – the curriculum – women tend to be missing, in the background, or in second place. Feminists often argue that women have been ‘hidden from history’ – history has been the subject of men.
Subject choice – traditionally, female students have tended to avoid maths, science and technology. Certain subjects were often seen as ‘boys’ subjects’ and ‘girls’ subjects. Often girls subjects had lower status and lower market value
Discrimination – there is evidence of discrimination against girls in education simply because of their gender. For example, when the 11-plus exam was introduced in the 1940s, the pass mark was set lower for boys than for girls to make certain there roughly equal numbers of boys and girl sin grammar schools. In other words girls were artificially ‘failed’ so boys could ‘succeed’.
Further and higher education – traditionally the number of female students going on to further and higher education has been lower than for boys. There is evidence that teachers often gave boys more encouragement than girls to go to university (Stanworth, 1983).
Feminist perspectives – an evaluation – Feminist perspectives have been valuable for exposing gender inequality in education. Partly as a result of sociological research, a lot has changed – for example, much of the sexism in reading schemes has now disappeared. Today, women have overtaken men on most measures of educational attainment. Their grades at GCSE and A level are significantly higher than those of male students. And more women than men are going on to higher education. The concern now is the underachievement of boys rather than discrimination against girls. Please read through the PowerPoint below further details.
Understanding the differences between these perspectives is key to grasping this module. So before you move onto the next lesson take some time to complete the test in the slideshow below. The answers follow every question. So work through each question individually and then compare your answers.
sociologytwynham.com 