Research into class and education

The aim of the research was to study the educational experiences of White working class pupils. A detailed case study research was carried out to study the school and home experiences of two male students aged 16-18 from my current placement school.

The methodology used for this research are a face to face interview, close observations of the students in lessons and extensive analysis of the data available for this purpose. This study was also supported by informal talks to teachers, tutors and students to gather evidence on barriers to learning, how well White British pupils are achieving and pupils’ views about the school and its support systems.

“Interviewing is well suited to the exploration of attitudes, values, beliefs and motives, allowing a rich corpus of data to be gathered.” (Spencer at al. 2013) and formed the major part of this project as the young people are preparing for examinations. Semi-structured interviews were used rather than more open-ended methods such as unstructured interviews, in order to facilitate a detailed exploration of different aspects of language and allow comparison across different groups, whilst at the same time providing leeway for participants’ own interpretation and priorities.

The study gained ethical approval through the University of Hull’s ethics procedure.

The head teacher of the school agreed for the study to take place and parents gave

consent for their children to participate. Participants themselves also signed consent forms

to agree to take part in the interview. Interviews took place individually and in a quiet room within the school, taking up to 20 minutes. The participants knew that the interviewer was not affiliated with the school and was there as a trainee teacher. At the beginning of each session, the purposes of the study were outlined again and participants were given an opportunity to withdraw from the study, although none did. The interviews were audio-recorded. Questions were used as an interview guide only, with flexibility to follow-up participants’ responses.

The aim of this section of the research was to develop an understanding of the school

experiences of White working class pupils through discussions with parents and pupils

and to explore what steps need to be taken to raise standard. Specific objectives were:

to explore barriers to learning and examine what steps need to be taken to raise

achievement. An ethnographical approach was adopted to explore the objectives above.

One of the discussions that took place in the ethnographic research was ‘the main barriers to achievement in schools’. Lack of parental aspirations and involvement in the school life, poverty and all that it entails such as inadequate housing, disruptive housing and overcrowding, language deprivation and lack of support from home are among the factors that came to light.

While discussing a lack of aspirations amongst parents for their children’s education, many highlighted a lack of education amongst White working class parents contributed to this. Having had a negative school experience themselves, these parents do not feel confident enough to be part of their child’s education, and see education as just being the business of the school. Moreoever, sending their children to school is just something to get out of the way before they settle for odd jobs or get married and live on benefits.

Headteachers are concerned that the able pupils are being hindered to reach their true potential by the low expectations that their own parents hold for them. Education does not have a high priority in the homes of White working class and this reflects on the child’s attitude to learning at school.

Poor attendance was a recurrent theme throughout discussions in schools. Many teachers complained that the White working class do not value education as a free tool or as an opportunity to open doors and as a result their children are either late or often miss days of normal school days or even take holidays weeks before GCSE exams.

Another barrier to aspiration is the lack of cultural capital that many White working class children are exposed to. It was found that many pupils know little of a life beyond home and school. Their parents refuse to pay for enrichment trips and they seldom attend out of school activities or attend other programs which can build up confidence, self-discipline and collaborative skills.

Another main barrier is the lack of parental involvement. White working class parents, especially those that have had little or no formal education do not expect to get involved in the school. Similarly, the school finds it hard to engage such parents. Even though, there are loads of opportunities that the parents could have gotten involved had they wanted to, they simply refused.

Poverty is yet another major factor in the underachievement of the White working class. Living on benefits on a low income, and temporary housing will ultimately disrupt the stability of family life. Such students are most likely to underachieve at school as they often live in overcrowded noisy areas and find it hard, almost impossible to study.

An enriched vocabulary is often what White working class children not exposed to at all. At home, they do not speak in the same language as they are expected to at school. However, in school teachers have to be careful not to denigrate the language that their parents might speak and schools find it difficult to offer language support in need of them as this is primarily for those students whose first language is not English. The EAL (English as an Additional Language) coordinators agree that they are not in a position to give this support unless as part of whole school strategies. On the other hand, White working class pupils feel that they do not get the support they need and argue that if they can have a Portuguese club after school, then why not an English club too? This opinion was echoed by several others and the study concluded that the White working class do not receive the support they need as a result there are few national strategies or little targeted support to tackle generations of low aspiration and to break the cycle of poverty and disadvantage. A pilot evaluation of the EMA suggests such approaches have an impact on both participation in non-compulsory education (Middleton et al 2005) and A-level performance (Chowdry et al 2007), particularly for those young people from the most deprived backgrounds. It is worth noting that, as of November 2010, government funds for the EMA will be redirected towards more targeted support for young people for whom there are financial barriers to their participation in further education.

Alongside specific programmes, schools that are successfully closing attainment gaps are also broadening pupils’ horizons by offering experiences and opportunities that they are unlikely to otherwise receive, for example, building links with local industry, and arranging visits to arts/drama groups and institutions of further/higher education.

As practitioners, aiming to raise the achievement of children from all disadvantaged backgrouds, I have explored a few ideas that I will strive to integrate in my own practice. I believe it is important to create an environment outside mainstream school that will allow children especially White working class boys to develop a positive attitude to learning. In addition, staying after school will give disadvantaged children the experience of out of school learning, hence developing positive relationships with teachers and feel more in control of learning.

Teachers should also aim to improve the homework experiences of these children and strive to include lots of independent learning which can build confidence in the child.

In addition, the teacher on his part, should develop new teaching strategies and approaches which offer better support for the disadvantaged students. Children and young people living in poverty respond to classroom interventions that improve instructional processes and teaching methods. Well-specified and well-supported programmes and practices provide the greatest learning outcomes, which motivate and engage all learners, not just those from poor backgrounds. Children from deprived areas respond positively to opportunities that raise their aspirations for learning and future success.

Across the studies reviewed, parental involvement in school, and their aspirations for their children, emerged as some of the most important factors associated with lower educational achievement, even controlling for family background (Blanden 2006; Goodman and Gregg 2010; Sodha and Margo 2010; Strand 2007 ). Case studies and observations from schools with a high proportion of white working-class pupils support these findings, reporting that ‘white working-class families are the hardest to engage within the life of the school and their child’s learning’ (Demie and Lewis 2010 p 44; DCSF 2008).

Therefore as a teacher, I will liaise regularly with the parents especially ‘hard to reach’ families in order to break cycles of low aspirations and disengagement in order to foster high expectations in them concerning their child. A parent’s community club could be held every week so as to familiarise parents with the national curriculum as well as help them in topics they do not feel confident with.

Whichever approach is taken, it is clear from this research that if students from deprived backgrounds feel powerless as learners, they will continue to have disappointing educational results. Therefore the transformation of educational relationships inside and outside the classroom will be at least as important as efficient delivery of the school curriculum in boosting the chances of children from disadvantaged families.

CONCLUSION

This study aims to examine the key barriers to learning to raise achievement of White

British pupils with low-income backgrounds. The main findings from the study

suggest that the worryingly low-achievement levels of many White working class

pupils have been masked by the success of middle class White children in the English

school system and the failure of government statistics to distinguish the White British

ethnic group by social background. The empirical data confirm that one of the biggest

groups of underachievers is the White working class and their outcomes at each key

stage are considerably below those achieved by all other ethnic groups. One of the

main reasons for pupil underachievement is low aspirations from their parents regarding

education and social deprivation. The root causes of underachievement have also

been identified within factors such as low-literacy levels, feelings of marginalisation

within the community, low level of parental education and lack of targeted support to

raise achievement and to break the cycle of poverty and disadvantage, a legacy of

low aspiration and a disinterest in learning that prevents pupils from fulfilling their

potential across a range of areas. The main obstacle to raising achievement is the failure

of central government to recognise that this group has particular needs that are

not being met by the school system. The government needs to recognise that the

underachievement of White British working class pupils is not only a problem facing

educational services but a daunting and profoundly serious challenge. The question

of social class and poverty has remained in the background. It is a hidden barrier

which policy makers might not be comfortable to discuss. The national policy makers

often seem to overlook the particular difficulties faced by White working class children.

The government seldom talks about class in general and White working class in

particular, preferring terms such as “hardworking families” and “social inclusion” as

part of a strategy to attract middle class voters. This has alienated and affected the

White working class. It is important this issue is addressed through additional

targeted funding.