Unequal Childhoods By Annette Lareau Essay

In The Merits of Meritocracy, by David Brooks, Brooks discusses the lives of middle-class children growing up in America. He opens up with an anecdote about his daughter, to lead into one of his main points: middle-class children have busy and protected childhood, filled with many opportunities supervised by adults (193). For instance, his daughter has four different helmets for biking, pogo sticking, skateboarding, and playing baseball (193). She is a prime example of how the middle-class is presented with opportunities and busy lives; because of this, Brooks claims the general middle-class parent fears their child is too spoiled by abundance, and will never have to commit to one thing (194). Another large fear Brooks states they have, is

We live in a culture where success is increasingly defined by a paycheck and is seemingly as important to the parent as the child. Raising children to be “successful” is increasingly becoming an obsession for upper-middle-class-parents, who encourage certain activities and scores to provide their child with the best chances of attending elite schools. The article focuses on the inherent advantage upper-middle-class parents provide but fails to mention those who the parent’s action affects: their children.

Children who grow up in a poor area go to school where there are 50 kids in one class and individual attention is never given, and children of high class families will go to schools that have smaller class sizes and individual attention. Even when a poor child goes to a better schoolteachers will question if the work done is their own and also only expect hard work from the rich kids. “if you are a child of low income parents, the chances are good that you will receive limited and often careless attention from adults in your high school.” Theodore Sizer “Horace’s Compromise,” “If you are the child of upper-middle income parents, the chances are good that you will receive substantial and careful attention.” (203) These quotes from another author showcase that school in America is often times based on the social standing of the parents.

In Annette Lareau’s study and subsequent book Unequal Childhoods, she examined the lives of twelve children of different social classes. In particular, she focused on parenting styles within their households and their effects on the children’s future and found a direct correlation. Two of the children from her study were Alexander Williams and Tyrec Taylor, both African-American nine-year-old boys.

Lubrano explains how middle-class children understand the importance of receiving higher education, while working-class children fail to see the purpose of preparing for a higher level in the short term. According to Lubrano, “Middle-class kids are groomed for another life” (534). Author Patrick Finn states, “Working-class kids see no such connection, understand no future life for which digesting Shakespeare might be of value” (534). In answering this question, Lubrano must look at the various circumstances that account for the poor performances among working-class individuals, the supportive relationships middle-class students have with their parents and teachers, and how children of working-class parents struggle when preparing for later life. In the address, Alfred Lubrano must address the difference in treatment between working-class and middle-class children attending

She also talks about how middle class parenting differs from the other social class. The middle class parents mostly dominate the lives of their children while the working class parents cannot concentrate that much on their kids. She also brought a name for this phenomena called “Concerted Cultivation”.

Lareau, in Unequal Childhoods, focuses on socioeconomic status and how that affects outcomes in the education system and the workplace. While examining middle-class, working-class and poor families, Lareau witnessed differing logics of parenting, which could greatly determine a child’s future success. Working-class and poor families allow their children an accomplishment of natural growth, whereas middle-class parents prepare their children through concerted cultivation. The latter provides children with a sense of entitlement, as parents encourage them to negotiate and challenge those in authority. Parents almost overwhelm their children with organized activities, as we witnessed in the life of Garrett Tallinger. Due to his parents and their economic and cultural capital, Garrett was not only able to learn in an educational setting, but through differing activities, equipping him with several skills to be successful in the world. Lareau suggests these extra skills allow children to “think of themselves as special and as entitled to receive certain kinds of services from adults” (39). Adults in the school system are in favor of these skills through concerted cultivation, and Bourdieu seems to suggest that schools can often misrecognize these skills as natural talent/abilities when it’s merely cultivated through capital. This then leads to inequalities in the education system and academic attainments.

Regardless of social class most parents wish for their children to be happy, healthy, and successful; however, parents disagree on the best way to raise their children to be all of those things, which is when social class determines the parents’ child rearing method. Whether a child comes from a working class or middle class family affects the child’s development and socialization; and consequently the child’s future.

Exploring the nuances of race and social position beginning in childhood and culminating in adulthood Lareau explores different approaches exercised by parents in raising children. Separating families into three categories, including: middle-class, working-class, and poor, the author began her study. Attempting to answer the question, “What is the outcome of these different philosophies and approaches to child rearing?” Lareau discovers that the answer was found in the “transmission of differential advantages” (Lareau 2011:5). Accordingly, these advantages equip children with tools to navigate through life progressively or prohibitively respective to the individual instruction obtained in childhood. In unearthing these discoveries, the author employed the use of ethnography through naturalistic observation utilizing field notes and taped recordings of interviews with family members.

In a child’s upbringing, the concept of social class and race plays a pivotal role in a child’s growth and development. In the ethnographic study, “ Unequal Childhoods: Class, Race, and Family Life”, the author, Annette Lareau argue that the influences of children with distinct socioeconomic backgrounds can determine how a child will be raised. The author primarily focuses on two distinctive practices of child-rearing: concerted cultivation and the accomplishments of natural growth. Lareau explains that both of these distinctive patterns of childrearing have their own benefits and drawbacks, but emphasizes on how concerted cultivation and parent involvement allows children to gain a deeper understanding of the world and the ability to fluently interact with social institutions. Also, the practice of concerted cultivation allows children to develop skills that are shown to be beneficial for the future. In contrast, the practice of natural growth limits the child’s language and communication skills, in which they are not adequately prepared for the challenges of adulthood. In my opinion, I believe that the way a child is raised has a significant impact on a child’s future.

In roughly 95 million middle-class American homes the notion of making last minute plans to share quality time with family and friends is challenging. With their priority for leisure time being focused on their children’s futures, making plans often involves two to four weeks advance notice. However, 200 million working-class and poverty level families accommodate those last minute plans with ease. Parenting styles in American families is what Annette Lareau addresses in Unequal Childhoods: Class, Race, and Family Life. Lareau identifies middle-class families as concerted cultivators, mothers and fathers that dominate their children’s lives with established, controlled and organized activities intended to give them experiences that

Educational Researcher by Gloria Ladson-Billings looked into the ratio between education and achievement and what the gap was between them and how to fix it. According to an interview with strict economist Professor Emeritus Robert Haveman of the University of Wisconsin’s Department of Economics he makes it clear by stating that “ In order to reduce the debt or gap in one being achievement you must then close the gap of the other being education” Ladson-Billings also goes on to recognize the parallel between not only your economic status when it comes to education but how well your parents did before you among many other things including your health along with your overall well being playing a factor into your education ( Ladson-Billings, Oct 2006, P 5). Additionally the first teachers of a student are their parents whom in the home are responsible for teaching their children the basic fundamentals they must adhere to within society in order to navigate throughout life.Thus giving them many opportunities to experience cultural and life development (Wilburn, Smith & Hill-Carter, 2013, P 242). This research ties into chapter three of our book where education is discussed and one such topic that Michael’s remarks upon would be annual family incomes and how depending on what is made shows what the students of the

Concerted cultivation versus achievement of natural growth are the two topical themes of Annette Lareau’s book unequal childhood. The ethnographic study she conducted with the eleven families reveals how the social structures can shape the cultural capital of the kids. The variation in the patterns of rearing in middle class families compared with that of the working class and poor families is directly echoed on the future perspective and potentials. The domains of interaction in the environments in which the kids acquire their knowledge and skills are determined by certain trajectories. The physical activities differ drastically between the social classes, where it tend to be highly organized, carefully chosen, and timely managed for the middle class families. As for the working and poor families’ kids, time and sports activities are poorly directed, randomly selected, and often less productive. There is also a variation in ways of communication and the type of language used across the families. Garret Tallinger

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.

Affluent families face unique challenges related to their children’s education. Families in affluent communities often deal with pressure to ensure their children’s high academic achievement. Landeros (2001) discusses how, “within a competitive society,…to care for one’s child is to make sure they have a competitive edge against other children” (p. 247). Affluent families often live in communities where they feel judged, both in social status and in their level of parenting, based on whether or not their child has the highest grades, and is on their way to the most prestigious college. This intense focus on achievement “threatens to make children both less happy and less moral” (p. 24). Constant pressure from families can result in an emotional and moral toll on children, including the potential for depression, difficulty accepting failure, and lack of morals. While trying to get ahead, “some parents fail to model a basic sense of fairness” (Weissbourd, 2011, p. 24). For example, when families will do whatever it takes to get ahead, if can include being dishonest, getting a false diagnosis from a psychiatrist to get extended exam time, or spending money to get positions of prestige for children in the community – all of which fail to teach children morals and good ethics.