The Gonski Report

Social Class and Education”. It opens by discussing research conducted in the 1960’s in an effort to identify factors contributing to differences in the academic achievement of Whites and Blacks (Banks & Banks, 2013). Researchers hypothesized that the achievement gaps were mainly the result of disparities in school resources and characteristics, but found that there is a high correlation between achievement and socioeconomic status (SES) (Banks & Banks, 2013). Furthermore, attention is drawn to the class stratification which exists in our educational system and works to maintain inequality through exclusion strategies such as ability grouping and tracking (Banks & Banks, 2013). Evidence of the correlation between social class and

Almost all the family incomes are over $100,000...The incomes in this school represent less than 1 percent of the families in the United States,” (256) compared to working-class families who earn incomes “at or below $12,000” (256). Anyon presents these examples to compare the backgrounds of each school and uses this as logos to persuasively reason her claim that quality of education is offered to people who can afford it. Public schools that working-class and middle-class families can afford do not offer the same education private schools that upper-class and capitalist families can afford. Wealthy children who are privileged get an advantage early on in their education career because they are able to afford better quality teachers and lessons. This varied quality of education found in curriculums is what creates the unequal divide between educated individuals in different social classes. An audience of scholars and teachers would be persuaded by this claim because Anyon’s data transparently shows the uneven distribution of resources and opportunity found in the social class schools.

In this article the author explains how the schools are based on a class system and higher-class areas have better recourses and more classes offered. Higher-class societies have better equipment, new technology, modern facilities, better books, and better teachers. Not only are the school’s educational facilities better the extracurricular activities are also better. For example sports facilities, training facilities, band, art, all because these lower class schools cant afford what these lower class schools can. Students in lower end districts are actually ending up worse off then the higher end students. Meaning attrition rate, drop out rate, sat scores and much more.

Despite students possessing a variety of needs and learning styles, the education system was designed for a “one-size-fits-all” in an attempt to meet every child’s needs and abilities. However, this is not the common perception by those who investigate further into the diverse environments of numerous, differing schools. Jean Anyon, in “Social Class and The Hidden Curriculum of Work,”argues that the style of education students receive is decided by the social class of their community and is not uniform when concerning students of all types. Instead, working class, middle class, affluent professionals, and executive elites experience significantly dissimilar school environments. Not only are they treated differently, and taught differently, but they’re prepared for a certain future that corresponds with their social class. Anyon’s synthesis is validated by my own experience at the Windham schools in Willimantic, where the demographics of the school corresponded with the confining, restrictive, and strict teaching style described by Anyon as ‘working class’. My account depicts the harsh reality of how my disadvantaged community suffers through a school system that does not prepare them for a future beyond a life of blue-collar jobs. However, my experience also disproves Anyon’s model through several details in the style of learning, such as going out of a textbook, or also being graded on a right answer.

There are diverse and contradictory views on school funding inequalities and school performance. Various research and reports have shown in great detail beyond this paper’s scope that inequalities in school funding does cause different outcomes for school children (Jackson, Johnson, & Persico, (2015. Unequal funding leads to unequal education: from the start, schools have different resources and means to educate our children (Kozol, (1991). Other reports suggest that different funding will lead to different social outcomes later on in life (Hyman, (2013); Biddle & Berliner, (2002). The fact is that schools in poorer neighborhoods all over the united states, funding are limited and they have poorer schools (Kozol, 1991). Schools in richer areas and especially in suburban white neighborhoods receive higher funding and they have better schools (Kozol, 1991). Some argue that school funding is not the problem and throwing money at the problem would not be the solution. This is somewhat contradictory because most well-funded schools are predominantly white. The schools are well lit, classrooms are spacious, student-to-teacher ratio is smaller, labs are well equipped, hot lunches are plenty, and teachers are experienced and well paid (Kozol (1991); Jackson, Johnson, & Persico, (2015).

There are huge class differences within the tripartite system. This consists of grammar schools for academically able pupils, technical schools, and secondary modern schools. Two- thirds of grammar school places are taken by middle-class pupils, and working-class pupils mainly attend secondary moderns. This suggests that being in a higher class gives the pupils more opportunities being at a grammar school, and suggests that they have higher academic abilities. Grammar schools have more facilities and will offer far more opportunities for the pupils, and as the pupils are from a higher class they will be able to afford any extra curricular activities or trips. Secondary moderns may not offer these things or may not have the same facilities so there is a big inequality. This is where material deprivation comes into place and families in the working class will suffer. If families are unable to afford uniforms, trips, transport to and from school, classroom materials and textbooks, it can lead children to be isolated and bullied, meaning their school work suffers. Marketization of schools means that there will be better resourced, oversubscribed schools in more affluent areas, while socially disadvantaged children are concentrated in a limited number of

Income inequality plays a major role in the education disparity present in communities such as West Chelsea. The economic hardship several families experience affects the way a child grows up and the certain education they receive. As seen in Class Divide, more privileged children can attend schools such as The Avenues where they are given opportunities to grow and learn, while less privileged students are

How about the children from low income families, educated in schools such as Parramatta High? Don’t they deserve the same opportunity as those educated in private schools? Dr Watson concludes that “[public] schooling as it is presently delivered does little to alter the early distribution of educational outcomes between social groups. In fact, the achievement gap between rich and poor students persists in the early years of schooling and widens as they progress through the school system”.

Tracing the life of a child, he shows how an initial slow start can cause the child to lag further behind as time goes on. What struck me the most about this was how early children’s life courses are set – even before birth. Barry lists poor nutrition during pregnancy, lack of paid parental leave, and low-quality medical care in childbirth as factors that can permanently impact the child’s future learning abilities. And when students carry their environmental disadvantages into schools, Barry ways schools become places where these hindrances are “compounded and not corrected for.” These early life experiences often disqualify students from even reaching college and getting a degree, which is becoming necessary for obtain a well-paying job. In this way, education seems to become a trap – education is a way out of poverty, but poverty is a hindrance to education. The ways in which inequality compounds in schools challenges how I think about the role schools play in society as educational institutions. By looking at how disadvantages and advantages accumulate through the course of schooling, I can better understand how schools contribute to wider social

138). These hierarchies are based on various factors such as social class, religion, nationality, race, ethnicity, or any other social distinction recognized by both society and the individual. Along with pointing out what other, mainly sociological, theories have highlighted about social stratification, SDT considers structural factors and makes the important step in considering psychological factors. Along with considering these different factors, SDT recognizes the way structural factors (i.e. institutional and societal) create psychological factors (i.e. attitudes) and how those in turn influence structural differences through mutual constitution (Sindanius et al, 1998).

Department of Education, “documents that schools serving low-income students are being shortchanged because school districts across the country are inequitably distributing their state and local funds”. (Education, 2011). Students that come from low income families are not given the equal chance to get the education that students from high income families get. If students are not given the tools they need to be educated, then they will have a poor chance of succeeding in the world.

Efforts to reach this are the provision of schools, with entry on a meritocratic basis. Following the 1944 Education Act in Britain, the removal of fees from secondary schools and the provision of student grants, certain financial barriers to educational attainment were minimised. Whether we measure equality of access fairly is a debateable topic, however there is overwhelming evidence which confirms that social class origins are strongly and clearly implicated in educational success or failure. Halsey, Heath and Ridge (1981), in a study of 8529 males educated in England and Wales, found that a boy who was considered middle class, compared to a boy in working class had fourth more times of attending a public school, eighteen times more chance of attending a minor independent school and twelve times more chance of attending a direct grant school and three times more chance of attending a grammar school (Journal of Social Policy, 1981). So this study heavily implies that the pattern of unequal access to the more prestigious secondary schools remained, despite the post war education reforms ‘the probability of a working-class boy receiving a fair education in the mid-fifties and sixties were very little different from that of his parents’ generation thirty years earlier’ (Halsey,

Children living in low-income families are not all alike, and many are very successful in school. It is well documented that children growing up in poorer families tend to have lower levels of educational attainment and participation in post-compulsory education than their more privileged peers. It is the children from some of the low-income families that will qualify for pupil premium money which, if used effectively, is a key part of schools strategies for closing he gaps. However what about those children who find school hard that do not qualify for pupil premium?

Bowles and Gintis felt it was important to write this article, because they believe that the politics of education are better understood in terms of the need for social control in an unequal and rapidly changing economic order. This point is illustrated on page 396 when the authors say, “The unequal

According to Nielsen (2013), in the United States, the government has been working hard in the due process of providing education to the children in the country. Despite the efforts that have been initiated by the United States education department, there is a problem of equity in education access around the nation. There are a good number of students who do not have the same opportunities as others when it comes to the education sector. For instance, in most cases, the quality of education that a student will get depends with their social class in the community. Those with a weak living condition are less likely to have the same quality of education as those who belong to the wealthy families. Therefore, the importance of equity, issues with sameness and the strategies suggested by Natalie (2013) and the report by the equity and excellence commission will form the basis of discussion for this paper.