Socioeconomic Status and Academic Achievement

What is the relationship between socioeconomic status and academic opportunity and achievement?

Boudon, Raymond. (1974). “Basic Mechanisms Generating Inequality of Educational Opportunity.” Education, Opportunity, and Social Inequality. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

This chapter attempts to provide a model for the creation of the inequality of educational opportunity (IEO) among social classes; the author uses survey data to address this issue. Initially, the author identifies several theories concerning IEO from the sociological literature: the “value theory” states that people in different socioeconomic classes differ in their values; alternately, the “social position theory” proposes that an individual’s social aspirations are related to their socioeconomic origins. He then provides data to support his own model for the basis of IEO. By introducing a two-step process by which IEO is generated--the primary effects of social stratification and its secondary effects upon an individual’s decision-making process--the author attempts to explain the various aspects of his data that were inconsistent with each individual theory. This ideology agrees with the functional theory of stratification. The evidence provided supports the model and validates the author’s argument, and is indeed in my mind convincing. The chapter provides a basic explanation for the cause of IEO, it does not merely identify the problem, and is therefore more complete and constructive than some of the other works cited here.

Cloward, Richard A. (1961).“Socioeconomic position and Academic Underachievement.” In William M. Cave and Mark A. Chesler, ed., Sociology of Education: An Anthology of Issues and Problems (pp. 134-48). New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc.

The author aspires to display an association between socioeconomic status and scholastic achievement; he uses archival data to support his argument. He begins his thesis by identifying two levels of underachievers: one who underachieves in contrast to the social ideology, and those who underachieve with the “unspoken support” of their society; those in the latter group largely constitute the lower class. Secondly, he explores the origins of the career mentality--high academic achievement at both secondary and post-secondary levels, leading to white-collar jobs--stressing it’s revolvement around middle-class values, which consequently excludes the lower class. He then states that students from the lower class perform poorly in school due to socialization: their parents do not expose them to intellectual matters necessary for academic success. The author’s ideology is consistent with the functional theory of social stratification, however it does contain elements of the conflict theory. I particularly favored this article as it focused upon people as individuals instead of collective classes. It was therefore more personal and convincing.

Hey, Stephen C., John A. Vonk, and Gary Willoughby. (1981). “A Theory of Academic Achievement.” In Blaine E. Mercer and Stephen C. Hey, ed., People in Schools: A Reader
of Learning and Teaching (pp. 97-118). Cambridge, Massachusetts: Schenkman Publishing, Inc.

The authors wish to prove that academic achievement is greatly influenced by socioeconomic status. They use archival data to support their thesis. The concept of the self plays a key role in determining academic success. Students are evaluated by authorities who ascribe certain prejudices to them; these evaluations negatively affect the student’s self image. Teachers subscribe to such prejudices because of their socioeconomic background, and that “success” in teaching revolves around changing behavior patterns in the students, a change most easily accomplished in middle-class students. Additionally, student tracking (assigning students to the various curricula) and ability grouping (classification of students into competency groups) influences self-image and consequently academic performance; such mechanisms greatly favor children from higher socioeconomic classes. This thesis is somewhat convincing--the supporting evidence is valid--yet it seems incomplete. It needs a more in-depth analysis of how self-image affects academic achievement (for example, it does not account for individuals of the low-class who have a bad self-image yet perform adequately in school: they seem motivated to transcend their socioeconomic status).

Martin, Wilfred B.W., and Allan J. Macdonell. (1982). “Educational Opportunities: Socioeconomic Variables.” Canadian Education: A Sociological Analysis. Scarborough, Ontario: Prentice-Hall Canada Inc.

In this section, the authors attempt to determine the extent to which socioeconomic variables influence academic opportunity and expectation. In order to accomplish this, they refer to the sociological literature (archival data) to provide evidence. The authors argue that there is indeed a strong correlation between the two. Most of the studies cited provide data showing that people from lower income families strive for less and consequently underachieve in their academic and career goals than their peers from the higher economic classes; this is frequently taken to the extreme point of ending their scholastic careers prematurely. Such a view is consistent with the functionalist theory of social stratification. While the argument is valid and the evidence complete and convincing, I would have preferred a more in-depth study. Perhaps personal interviews or a case study might have complemented the conclusiveness of the article.

Rist, Ray C. “Student Social Class and Teacher Expectations: The Self-Fulfilling Prophecy in Ghetto Education.” (1970). In Blaine E. Mercer and Stephen C. Hey, ed., People In Schools: A Reader of Learning and Teaching (pp. 75-96). Cambridge, Massachusetts: Schenkman Publishing Company, Inc.

The author provides a case study in an attempt to prove that students from low socioeconomic class perform poorly in school compared to their peers from the middle- and high-classes. Focusing initially on the teacher, the author demonstrates the prejudice of the educational system against students from the low class: they do not receive the amount of attention from the teacher as do their higher class peers. In response to this: the low-class students began to teach themselves; the higher class students internalized the ideology of the teacher and directed their derision upon the low-class students; and the low-class students ultimately began to show hostility towards each other. Ultimately, children from the low-class performed poorly, and continued to do so, because their success is not reinforced, and they lacked self-esteem and motivation concerning academics. Due to the personal nature of the evidence, I can relate to the issue presented; it is another study focusing upon individuals. It is quite effective in proving its point.