Does social class over power gender at attainment in schools?

[Emily19]

Hello,
I am currently studying on an access to Teacher Training course. I intend to research "Does social class over power gender at attainment in schools?".

Any Information given is completely confidential, if you require a copy of any work I have used, I will be more than happy to supply you with a copy. (In your opinion)

• What are your views on Social class affecting attainment in schools?

• What are your views on Gender affecting attainment in schools?

-Which do you think has the greater influence?

Many Thanks

The question does not make sense Jaded.

Wow, OP has gone mighty quiet.

Wordfactory you say she is being derided and patronised but I'm not sure whether you saw her original post (indistinguishable). I suggested there that she try a more original approach and other posters attempted to be constructive too.

She ignored all advice given by posters and re-posted, rather bull-headed I think. OK we're talking Access not PhD but even so. I'd expect more spark from GCSE coursework tbh.

Her lack of creative thinking and refusal to entertain alternative approaches and ideas doesn't bode well for a teacher. On current form, I wouldn't shortlist her for a job at my kid's (state) school, let alone employ her.

Both educational sectors need teachers with some quality which marks them out in a positive way; Emily looks wanting so far.

I won't be surprised if it emerges that 'Emily' is a journalist trying to put together an article. Sadly this is the way the Daily Mail et al do their research these days.

Frankly, I don?t see what all the fuss is about, Emily. I don?t blame you for not coming back to your own thread but one word of advice if I may ? in life, you shouldn?t be discouraged by adverse comments. I personally have no problems in understanding your post and your command of the written English language is perfectly acceptable to me (barring some inappropriate use of capital letters here and there). But honestly, I?ve seen worse phrasing of text and ambiguity even in some official government documents to say the least.

To me, some people are just too judgmental. They call you lazy, not pulling your own weight and slam you down for posing an ambiguous question like the one in quotation in your opening paragraph. For all I know, you may just be the complete opposite. The question you asked at the beginning may not even be your own words but exactly as you?ve quoted as given to you by your tutor. But all that your critics have to do is to use their common sense and get on with it and give their opinion(s), if they have any, like you had requested at the end of your post ? questions that are perfectly straightforward and comprehensive.

In this instance, Mumsnet is just another perfectly acceptable avenue to conduct your research as the British Library or standing in front of your local supermarket. This is no more different from people coming here to ask (say) which is a better school; shall I go private or state; and a million other questions. So I hope you?ll continue coming here for more questions and answers and I?m certain you are intelligent enough to agree/disagree with opinions of posters and to finally form your own.

Good luck to your undertaking and your course.

peteneras immensely long post but you haven't actually given Emily any direct response whatever to her original post.

social class has everything to do with it. But i come at it from a very different angle.

schools who have parents that pay fees, are directly pAYING for a service, resources and skills. a certain standard is expected, as are certain results. these results can be obtained in the main becuase of the skills and resources which have been purchased.

those resources, skilled teachers, larger class sizes, inadequate schools - are part of the problem in non fee paying schools.

so, why is there still a gulf between the upper working class and the underclass at these schools?

By secondary school, it is very much a matter of directing the meagre resources towards those that will benefit most and have shown most educational aptitude.
That leaves the mediocre average student to do their best - and by Jove, some do.
It also leaves the can't be arseds, the what's the points, and the academically thick as two short planks.

I maintain that it is a simple equation.

children start school aged 5 years old
they go to school and have an average of 4 hours learning time per day.
google tells me 195 school days in a year

for ELEVEN years.

if the resources, good teaching practice, smaller class sizes etc were in place i would wager that the majority of children would get through school and through the other side with meaningful qualifications.

Parental influence is indeed a factor but the parent of a mediocre child who has little by the way of resources at school who supports her all the way, does homework each and every night sat by their childs side - cannot have as big an impact as the resources that a mediocre child at a fee paying school would get.

look, we don't like to speak of these things openly, but resources have to be managed. kids ARE streamed and they know it, more time and effort is given to those children who have aptitude. it isn't out of unkindness but out of necessity. there isn't enough time in the day for teachers to put their energy into driving forward every mediocre child - who with the right amount of resources - could pass.

Culture is a factor also - hugely so with the whats the points and the cant be arseds. but again i would argue - look at the equation above. if a child had the resources - ANY CHILD WITH THE EXCEPTION OF the academically thick as two short planks, would - i would argue despite prevelant culture outside the classroom, despite parenting - would still pass exams - just look at how much time a child is in school.

The prevelant culture outside the classroom is echoed within school structure.

secondary school should base itself on a meritocricy. it should - as in america - have a minimum standard for each child to reach each yer before moving up with their peers.

ESPECIALLY at teen years when the whole universe is governed by peer group - It would dessimate a child to be told they have to leave their peers. What more motivation do you need in a system with scarce resources, teachers , huge classroom sizes etc etc - i mean if any solution could be employed that wouldn't cost a lot - it should be this.

I think the NI link shows the huge importance of culture/parents and the relative unimportance of other factors, where SE factors are similar.

US high schools (afaik) stream ruthlessly. Everyone knows the streaming is done. It is the only way to make classrooms manageable and cater for the often huge differences in ability and motivation and learning style that exist in the mostly large student bodies. It is also the only way to ensure that groups of teens with very different ambitions and career potential get the sort of education most suitable for them.

Streaming at elementary level isn't done much at all. There is no such thing as an 11 plus or the same separation of sheep and goats that happens in British schools at the start of secondary. You go from the middle school or the K-8th grade (age 14) parochial school straight to the local public high school (a very small minority goes to private high school). I think streaming at elementary level has a horrible effect on the self esteem and self perception of students where it is practiced. I think there's a strong element of self fulfilling prophesy to it.

'It would dessimate a child to be told they have to leave their peers'

And you see this as a good thing?

I agree that everything should be done to ensure every child meets minimum standards for each year group and I've often argued that we should make use of summer schools and additional support to help kids catch up BUT there are no advantages to getting children to stay down a year where they are either insufficiently able or insufficiently motivated to keep up. Keeping them back isn't going to help either of those things and, in fact, is likely as you point out to completely destroy their self-esteem and motivation. Also, there are some children who are just never going to be able to cope with certain things academically and since you can't keep them in school for ever it's much better for them to pick up some things that are age appropriate than go over the same ground again and again when some of it they're getting and some of it they'll never get.

I couldn't disagree with most of your post more strongly custardo and I've had about 15 years teaching experience in a variety of schools.

I also think holding up the example of American schools as a model is wrong, wrong, wrong. Standards in American schools are notoriously poor with bright students often left frustrated. My mum is American and came to university here primarily for these reasons.

Also streaming/setting has consistently been shown to have no academic benefit with the possible exception of those at the very top (who are by definition doing well anyway). You essentially write off all but the top set/stream as second best and more importantly they lose out on the role models/ aspirations/ high level discussion etc etc of the top performers. Teachers expect lower standards of all but the top set and therefore get them. The very bottom sets know we've given up on and understandably therefore give up. They spend 5 years with people who are also not very able and not very motivated often with learning and/or behavioural difficulties which sets them up for very little except perhaps a life of petty crime and wasting time on benefits.

If you had worked for the number of poor untalented managers from private schools that I have you would know that 'attainment' is not the same as actually being good at something - there is not so much an ability gap, but an opportunity gap between social classes and that for damn sure trumps gender. Also you only have to look at the number of middle class women in relatively top jobs even in the 60s and 70s and the number of men in shitty, low status, transtory work in poor working conditions to realise that it is much better to be middle/professional class woman than it is to be male in terms of 'attainment'. Even when women work in low status jobs (in the UK), those jobs tend to be in better work environments - which is one argument for why women get paid less than men as an average.

I don't agree that streaming is bad - I went to a school that dropped streaming and I had to be educated with people who were thick as mince and they got all the teaching time, all the rewards for 'effort' and were almost encouraged to bully and sideline the intelligent kids 'because they don't need lessons' - it was awful and I really suffered - to this day I still pretend I am bad at my job, deliberately (though without being able to control it) fail at tasks I know I can be really good at if I try, and I am also practiced at being lazy and only doing things at the last minute, because I could swithc off all year and make a little bit of effort before the exams and outperform 80% of the class. it was depressing really that so much state money was wasted on keeping me in such a treading water position. Now when I go to work, I see completely unaware and bumbling managers who came through a private school system, and pay themselves £60-£80K who I know I can do better than, have proved so on a few occasions, yet I never get promoted because I only have a degree when they have been able to self- or parent-finance a masters or PhD, yet I can out argue them, and obviously know more than they do sometimes about the same subject they did at masters - so yes, I would say that class has an almost impenetrable hold on our society even still - ability is a long way down in the reasons why people move to top jobs. Its disgusting, but sadly true.

I see the debate has moved on somewhat. Are we discussing school attainmentnow? Or are we discussing why state schools are so bad? Or are we discussing socio economic factors in getting work?

Its a big question.

I am rapidly forgetting ( because it was so painful) what it was like to teach in a state school. But I do remember this - I was tired of the abuse, the name calling, and even the physical attacks I experienced.

State schools may set but unfortunately cant be assed kids are found in all classes regardless. These disruptive individuals tend to act as a group in that situation and often teaching is impossible. A whole lesson is spent doing nothing more than getting classroom control and management.
The disruption started from the moment ( or before) they got through the door so there was never a chance to0 deliver that interesting, engaging, informative and all action lesson!

In most classes of 30 ( or less sometimes) there would be a hard core of 10 or 12 who would not allow the rest of the class to learn. This had nothing to do with ability. It had all to do with culture and the way the kids were brought up and the way their parents viewed school.

Whilst I may have smaller classes now ( about 20) the number of disruptive pupils can be counted on one hand in the WHOLE SCHOOL. Whilst the school I work for does select some pupils for a bility by and large the majority are there just because their parents pay, so we have a broad range of ability and the school considers itslf " non selective". We even have some pupils with learning needs - currently one downs syndrome, , one ASD and several dyslexic and other specific needs. The real difference is that pupils arrive willing to learn whatever they can according to their ability and to do the best they can. I get a chance to teach those good lessons.

If we do have a particularly disruptive child , it isnt long before they leave
(Thank God!) . If you insist on having special needs, emotional behavioural difficulties and all other comers in the same class ( including top sets - yes, they put them there if they are considered " bright but challenging") then you ask for a system where no one can be taught any6thing because too much time is taken just dealing with the problems.

I am a good teacher. I managed to get decent results even in a difficult comp BUT I am damn glad I am out of it now and teaching good kids who try and will achieve more because they want to. I am motivated to help them because they help themselves.

Its all about attitude, discipline and willingness.

As for all those summer schools and Easter revision classes etc. that you so badly think should be done. I bet you think teachers get paid for those dont you?

Well listen up - I didnt get paid for that. Neither did I get paid enough to make it worth giving up a holiday.

As for school resources being thrown at the most able . Think again. Most money in state school is thrown at dealing with the most challenging and least able. That was something else I got fed up with.

I would say parental involvement is a more important factor than social class

I can't believe we are talking about education here nd then saying that because someone can't write in good grammar now, they will never make a good teacher that's like saying none of us will ever work because we could only breast feed as babies.

I think in this thread we ARE seeing exactly the kind of crap that blocks people apart from the most determined or the most wealthy from entering professions.

In answer to what kind of teacher will the OP make if her grammar is a bit weak and her essay and research skills are poor before she starts her teaching course -the answer is a typical teacher you can't be expected to have the skills at the start of the course that you are expected to have at the end. Stop bullying the OP and start trying to think outside your narrow prejudices.

And yes you do get paid for the summer and holiday work - you get paid a very high salary for the term period that is spread out into a monthly salary that pays you throughout the year and compensates you higher than the average graduate starting salary or higher - a salary higher than over 40 million people in the country. Stop bleating.

Actually Missingfriendsandsad teachers are salaried for 39 weeks only and don't get paid for holidays or holiday work.

And also, not many of us are demonstrating the clarity and discipline of thought needed in an essay!

Research can either be done by looking at education stats or by sociology books, but do remember that sociology up until the late 1990s was a deliberately agenda led subject rather than being completely objective.

A good book to read is 'why to working class kids get working class jobs' which explains that attainment is also 'limited' by that fact that class expectations of what is needed in work stay with the class even if the jobs change, so working class men still have hanging around a culture of being forced into education against their will, and learning things that have no relevance to the manual factory or other work they will end up doing. This translates into a culture of going to school only to enjoy the politics and socialising, not the work. Today we also have the culture of unemployment lain on top, so that there is an even more negative attitude even to trying to do anything, and a social culture of early babies, drinking and killing time prevalent.

Its also worth looking at work about relative rewards. As a middle class kid with resources and support, working harder for qualifications means better paid work and better used leisure time. As a working class kid in areas with an overlain unemployment culture work takes away one of the major benefits of adulthood - freedom - and rewareds very little for doing so. Add to this that working people take up to 24 years to obtain a house that is ostenibly 'theirs', people in working class areas who start families earlier, unemployed or not, will get a house that it 'theirs' by age 22 or earlier.

i.e the financial and social incentives for 'non-attainment' are greater for working class boys for the first few years of adulthood. Add that to the massive rewards girls give to boys who are anti-establishment and seem to be behaving in an 'adult' way at school (i.e making choices about what they engage with and what they don't, playing the politics, having fun) through giving them attention and social rewards for being like that you have a clear strategy for disadvataging working class men.

In mixed class schools tthere is an even more confusing dynamic - again there is specific work on this, but typically being successful is seen as 'getting away with it' ie. not trying but still doing alright. which is great for the people who can do this, and great for the people who don't want to try and want to move the achievers closer to their level, but terrible for people who have expectations of middle class professional jobs, when their school culture is actively fighting against that - really high performing children can find themselves at the bottom of the 'true' middle class pile just by association with working class kids!

:) oops! I quite like this topic - feel free to riff off any ideas above! But read an essay writing book, and keep tight to the topic, above would be more an example of a ramble/opinion piece than an essay so DON'T COPY

Missing, I would like to dispute your suggestion that teachers who cannot string together a question that makes sense and have not mastered basic grammar or essay writing skills are typical and I have taught in the state sector for 15 years. I also cannot believe you are trying to justify such poor communication skills as acceptable in a teacher. If the teacher cannot communicate effectively what hope have the kids got?????? I certainly would not be happy if my kids were taught by such a teacher and nor could I have faith in any colleagues with such poor communication skills. What a very depressing point of view.

And it is mistaken to assume that an adult who has not picked up these skills will somehow be taught them on a degree course or teacher training course. I know increasingly universities are having to offer additional support in these sorts of areas but this is not really the purpose of FURTHER and HIGHER education (with the clue being in the names).

In fact, though teaching is becoming increasingly competitive and it is unlikely that someone unable to string a sentence together is even to be shortlisted. We've just had an incredibly able and well qualified student teacher (with a first class degree) who has applied for about 10 jobs and not even got an interview yet.

jabed, I'm not sure how helpful it is to assume that you can represent the experience of all teachers and I'm not quite sure who you're addressing with your rant about state schools.

In fact, interestingly, I have been paid to do revision days and summer schools by various LEAs as well as various G & T events (including an additional GCSE in a twilight session open to students from all schools in the LEA) and transition to 6th form sessions.

But what I was arguing is that there SHOULD be a better and consistent approach to supporting students who have not met the basic targets for the year which might involve summer schools etc. That is one of the few useful things that we COULD learn from the American system (although as I argued earlier I see no benefit in holding kids back a year). In fact, the previous Govt rolled out a programme of individual tuition in English and Maths for such students. I can't remember the name of it and don't know what happened to it but that strikes me as a really good idea.

I found your post very negative jabed. I'm glad you've found happiness in a fee paying school but I am left wondering what you think should happen to all those students who are not motivated or have behavioural problems or learning difficulties, who do not have supportive parents and cannot afford or get in to private schools.

"And yes you do get paid for the summer and holiday work - you get paid a very high salary for the term period that is spread out into a monthly salary that pays you throughout the year and compensates you higher than the average graduate starting salary or higher - a salary higher than over 40 million people in the country. Stop bleating."

You are kidding arent you? How much do you think I get paid? When I left my last school I was on an fte equivelent of 28K. That was after I had been in the job for 15+ years. I know artisans who got more and worked fewer hours.

I am not bleating but I did not consider it a good use of my time to be made to work holidays and after school running revision classes when most of the kids couldnt be bothered to turn up. When they did they came to see friends and so the session was really a youth club event.

I was not paid to be verbally and physically abused . I am not paid to be sworn at and I am not paid to do your childs coursework for them. But that is what seemed to be expected.

Now, compare. I work in the private sector. I get paid more. I work fewer hours. I get much longer holidays . I am NOT expected to work hoildays or after hours for revision classes. The school deem you an unsatisfactory teacher if you cannot get done in terms that which has to be done, thus leaving pupils to revise independently during their holidays when the school not only closes down but often lets out its facilities to the Open University and other such providers for their students to use.

Sometimes , occassionally, I may run an odd class after school if a student group or individual requests it. I may not be paid for that but I am more than rewared by their committment to it.

I stopped bleating and shipped out of the state sector ( in comon with many very good teachers) precisely because of attitudes like that you express.
Thats why the state system has what it has and gets the results it gets and middle class kids in middle class privately paid for schools do far better
(at least in part).

Its still back to attitude , discipline, including self discipline and work ethic. I am not sure how much I need parental support...... maybe they can support effectively by staying out sometimes. Many of those I teach now have little or no parental input other than the fees being met but they still achieve. What I do not get is children or parents with crass attidues mouthing off obscenity.

I would say parental involvement is a more important factor than social class
Mrz

I would prefer to say that appropriate parental involvement (thats which moves pupils forward) is a factor of social class.

"jabed, I'm not sure how helpful it is to assume that you can represent the experience of all teachers and I'm not quite sure who you're addressing with your rant about state schools."

I was not aware I was trying to represent ALL teachers. Just presenting the views of one ( and those expressed to me by many others) who have become disillusioned with state education. I just responding to various comments that had been made. I chose not to identify any particular poster because I didnt feel it would be appropriate to do so.

I wasnt aware either we were discussing this in a tight essay style format.
That was not apparent in any of the pre ceeding posts.

"In fact, interestingly, I have been paid to do revision days and summer schools by various LEAs as well as various G & T events (including an additional GCSE in a twilight session open to students from all schools in the LEA) and transition to 6th form sessions."

Then you have been lucky. I have worked for three different LEA's and worked for Head Teachers who demanded I run revision courses after school and over Easter without pay. Needless to say I did not do it. I felt it set an inappropriate example. It was being made compulsory. I have often in the past run revision days in school holidays voluntarily at student demand. But this was being forced on both parties. Also I might add ( and I dont want to sound smug) I found that my students performed as well without those additional clases and I had some of the best results in the school. So I am not sure how useful such classes are anyway.

Now I occassionally run "crammer days" - usually in the Easter - for students and my school opens these up to other pupils from other schools and charges a nominal fee for those interested. I am quite happy to do that.

"But what I was arguing is that there SHOULD be a better and consistent approach to supporting students who have not met the basic targets for the year which might involve summer schools etc. That is one of the few useful things that we COULD learn from the American system (although as I argued earlier I see no benefit in holding kids back a year). In fact, the previous Govt rolled out a programme of individual tuition in English and Maths for such students. I can't remember the name of it and don't know what happened to it but that strikes me as a really good idea."

I am not sure how useful such a move would be. Also , from my own time in the US I can recall these summer schools were not taught by teaching staff ( at least in the state where I worked). Many were taught by students doing summer work and by substitutes. They were paid.

But even then I am not sure how it would fare here in the UK . Cultures are different. I can certainly see that most of the pupils who needed it in my last state school would not have reported to such summer schools. Their parents would have been antagonistic at best. Some would have used it as a free baby sitting service for the summer and I have a feeling it would have done little or no good. Indeed I am sure that research done on this topic did show that the experimental summer schools run for SAT's some years ago brought the pupils up during the period of the summer school but all the ground was lost within a term of going back to school.

"I found your post very negative jabed. I'm glad you've found happiness in a fee paying school but I am left wondering what you think should happen to all those students who are not motivated or have behavioural problems or learning difficulties, who do not have supportive parents and cannot afford or get in to private schools."

Maybe that is because I found it a negative experience. In hindsight even more so. I worked most of my life in the state system because I felt I wanted to offer the best possible opportunities to those working class kids who throughout my teacher education I was told needed good teachers and who I was told were failed because of that. I was told from the properganda that they needed committed people willing to help them aspire etc. etc.

I cannot answer you as to what I think should happen to all those with behavioural and learning difficulties in state schools.

I doubt seriously I will ever need to move back to the state sector because of a lack of fee paying middle class customers. Interestingly, since the recession my school has seen an increase in pupil role. The whole thing about the middle middle classes ( or the middling sort as they might once have been called) is that they never seem to be affected by recession and their offspring are relatively unaffected by unemployment.

The people I feel most for are the lower middle classes who really need good schools within state provision to help them achieve their goals. Sadly there is too little such provision and a lot of people chasing what there is. I see symptoms of it here when parents worry about the schools their children have been allocated. But that is yet another debate.

And also, not many of us are demonstrating the clarity and discipline of thought needed in an essay!

Just to clarify something I hinted above. I was not aware that writing an essay was the prupose of this thread. I was under the impression we were just all having an exchange of ideas.

Essays are formal and need to be done in formal situations. This is a social networking group.

I would disagree jabed some working class parents are highly motivated to support their children, while some middle class parents fail to engage. Neglect crosses all class lines.