Sociology - cultural deprivation

One of the major causes of underachievement is the lack of economic capital, proposed by Pierre Bourdieu (1984), that a working class family possess. As item A states, ‘sociologists claim that factors outside the school, such as parental attitudes and parental income, are the main causes of working class underachievement.’ Children who belong to a working class background may not be able to afford the necessary equipment or meet the

In this essay, I will assess the strengths and limitations of unstructured interviews for investigating the effect of material deprivation on educational achievement by using Item B and my own knowledge. Material deprivation is the idea that a lack of money leads to disadvantages, Item B gives an example of ‘low household income, poor housing and a lack of work space in the home.’

Children whose parents have had poor education or lack numeracy and literacy skills may struggle at school. Their parents may show little in their education and as a result they themselves may also lose interest and starts miss behaving in class or follow in the wrong crowd of friend which will lead to them failing in their education and struggle to get employment as an adult.

In the study Lareau conducted, it can be see that working class and poor families differ slightly in that being poor means less resources and a means of a greater struggle for the child. The similarities found explain why being lower class has it benefits in some areas then if you were middle or upper class. Now Lareau is not telling people to raise their children one way or that being rich is better because even the rich have many disadvantages their children encounter. Lareau emphasizes, “Overall, daily life for working-class and poor children is slower paced, less pressured, and less structured than for their middle- and

Parsing out the influences of cultural and structural factors leading to differential behaviors among the poor and nonpoor is a difficult challenge for sociologists concerned with stratification and inequality. This is largely due to the fact that they appear to be so heavily intertwined. Structural and cultural factors reinforce each other in complex ways. Pervasive cultural elements such as ideologies and values are used to frame and interpret existing socio-economic structures and their effects on individuals. Structural forces such as access to resources such as information, education and employment shape cultural views and attitudes as well.

The idea that working-class children will most likely under-achieve due to a lack of culture, also known as cultural deprivation, refers to children lacking the norms, values, beliefs, skills and knowledge that a society would regard as important and necessary. The attributes that these children should know and learn are, in most cases, taught by their parents and are passed to the next generation through socialisation. All children are socialised differently, and the social class of the parent has a huge impact on the child and may affect their achievement in education. According to the cultural deprivation theory, some working-class

According to Bynner and Joshi (1999) class differences have persisted since the late 1950’s. It can be seen that all studies carried out by various theorist came to the same conclusion that middle class pupils tend to do a lot better than working class in terms of educational achievement. Pupils from middle class backgrounds tend to pass more exams, stay on at school for longer and are five times more likely to go to university. This gap in achievement widens with age as right from nursery school to university, processes like labelling or the self fulfilling prophecy take

One of the material conditions which is called “Social class” affects education. Because the people who are in lower social statuses are not able to afford a premier education, the necessary tools to complement a public education, or continuing education. In addition, people who are in a lower socioeconomic standing also have a harder time staying in school compared to the people who live in a higher social status.

The impact of poverty on families can affect a child's growth and development. “Poverty and the Effects on parents and Children,” Nagel states, “Families in poverty, when parents are working, are influenced by the kind of occupations in which the parents work. Kohn has found that lower-class parents look at their children's behavior with a focus on its immediate consequences and its external characteristics, whereas middle-class parents explore their children's motives and the attitudes expressed by their behavior.” Growing up with negative and disciplinary parents, it can impact a child's moral and emotional growth through life. Children grow up by the examples and actions of their progenitor, and if they have meager parents then they may grow up to be just like them. “Another study conducted by the U.S. Department of Education found that for every year a child spends in poverty, there is the chance that the child will fall behind grade level by age 18.” Pupils that live in poverty that don't get

There is no agreement or consensus reached on the proper definition of the term underclass. Furthermore, most researches have not determined the size of the underclass population, much less, on how the underclass population has changed over time. Most people assume that the term underclass implies a group of people who live in isolation, or are isolated from the rest of the society. Secondly, these kinds of persons (underclass) have low paying jobs and are not economically relevant, therefore, living in poverty conditions. Thirdly, these individuals (underclass) are characterised by social nonconformity, which has increased because of outmigration of the middle class people, who served as their mentors. There have been issues with the clear description of the underclass, as research done on the underclass comprises all individuals living in poverty or residing in poverty areas. Arguably, not all people living within a poverty residence are poor (Belina 20).

In Gillian Evans’ book of ‘Educational Failure and Working Class White Children in Britain,’ she mainly draws attention between the link of social class and education. Children, who have been brought up in a working class background, do not really have much of a head start in education in comparison to children who come from middle/upper-class backgrounds (Evans, 2006). Educational and economic status of parents plays an essential role on the road to success for their children. What’s more, her chapter proposes that children from working class backgrounds are innate to possess a low level of intelligence, but it can still be argued that a minority of children who come from working class backgrounds do tend to get great results (Evans, 2006). The author has illustrated an outlook on the social structure of intelligence and the way in which a child’s and parents relationship can have an impact on their level of understanding (Evans, 2006). It is commonly known that children tend to always pick things up and the learning process is

In the article “Culture of Success”, Brink Lindsey is quite equivocal; first Lindsey claims that low income is affecting education, but based on the surveys and research conducted he invalidates, his claims. Apart from low income, the main reason which Lindsey considers is lack of parental education, working for long hours to support the family and because of this they, do not involve more in their child's life, and do not give the motivation to develop

Socioeconomic Status is where a particular person or group of people stand in regards to social class. The main measurement that determines one's socioeconomic status is level of education, occupation and income. Although it may not be considered a factor in child development, socioeconomic status can actually play a huge role in determining what kind of adolescent a child develops into. It can influence a child’s morals, self-esteem, grades and many more aspects of a child's life. Socioeconomic status can play a role in determining where a person resides, the occupation they end up getting, their education and their income as well. So, although one’s socioeconomic status is technically made up of these aspects, one can be born into a low socioeconomic status which could result in them continuing to have one throughout their life. It is a cycle that one must break in order to change the outcome. Low socioeconomic status can result in child poverty. Child poverty over the years has risen and fallen but has remained consistently apparent in America. Child poverty can have detrimental effects on developing children and adolescents. It may influence the way they are raised, taught, cared for and many more aspects of the child's life which are important for successful development. Low socioeconomic status can determine how well children and adolescents develop and the type of person they develop into, including

Much of how an individual turns out to be is not only dependant on the genes in which their parents have passed down to them, but also due to the family structure in which they were raised by.

All families want their children to be happy, healthy, and grow. Social classes make a difference in how parents go about meeting this goal. In Annette Lareau book, Unequal Childhoods: Class, Race, and Family Life, she promotes middle class parents as concerted cultivation. Middle class parents encourage their children’s talents, opinions, and skills. For example, engaging their children in organized activities and closely monitoring children’s experiences in school. According to Lareau, middle class children gain an emerging sense of entitlement through this pattern of converted cultivation. This causes a focus on children’s individual development. There are signs that the middle class children gain advantages from the experience of concerted cultivation. However, the working class and poor children do not gain this advantage.