Class Differences in Achievement (External Factors) - Material Deprivation

Class Differences in Achievement (External Factors) - Material Deprivation

1. Material deprivation refers to poverty and a lack of material necessities such as adequate housing and income.

   • Poverty is closely linked to educational underachievement.
     • According to the Department for Education (2012), barely a third of pupils eligible for free schools meals achieve five or more A*-C GCSEs, as against nearly two thirds of other pupils.
     • Jan Flaherty (2004) says that money problems in the family are a significant factor in younger children's non-attendance at school.
     • Exclusion and truancy are more likely for children from poorer families.
     • Nearly 90% of 'failing' schools are located in deprived areas.

2. HOUSING

   • Poor housing can affect pupils' achievement both directly and indirectly.
     • Overcrowding can have a direct effect by making it harder for the child to study. Overcrowding means less room for educational activities, nowhere to do homework, disturbed sleep from sharing beds or bedrooms, etc.
   • Development can be impaired for young children through lack of space for safe play.
     • Families living in temporary accommodation may find themselves having to move frequently, resulting in constant changes of school and disrupted education.
   • Poor housing can also have indirect effects, notably on the child's health and welfare.
     • Children in crowded homes run a greater risk of accidents.
     • Cold or damp housing can cause ill health.
     • Families in temporary accommodation suffer more psychological distress, infections and accidents. Such health problems mean more absences from school.

3. DIET & HEALTH

   • Marilyn Howard (2001) notes that young people from poorer homes have lower intakes of energy, vitamins and minerals.
     • Poor nutrition affects health, for example by weakening the immune system and lowering children's energy levels.
       • This may result in more absences from school due to illness, and difficulties concentrating in class.
   • Richard Wilkinson (1996) found that among 10 year olds, the lower the social class, the higher the rate of hyperactivity, anxiety and conduct disorders.
   • Jo Blanden and Stephen Machin (2007) found that children from low income families were more likely to engage in fights which are likely to disrupt their schooling.

4. FINANCIAL SUPPORT & THE COSTS OF EDUCATION

   • Lack of financial support means that children from poor families have to go without equipment and miss out on experiences that would enhance their educational achievement.
     • David Bull (1980) refers to this as 'the costs of free schooling'.
     • Emily Tanner et al (2003) found that the cost of items such as transport, calculators, uniforms, books, etc, places a heavy burden on poor families.
       • Consequently, poor children may have to make do with hand-me-downs and cheaper but unfashionable equipment. This may result in them being isolated, stigmatised or bullied by peers.
   • Flaherty states that fear of stigmatisation helps to explain why 20% of those eligible for free school meals do not take up their entitlement.
   • Teresa Smith and Michael Noble (1995) add that poverty acts as a barrier to learning in other ways, such as inability to afford private schooling or tuition.
   • Lack of funds means that children from low-income families often need to work.
     • Ridge found that children in poverty take on jobs such as babysitting, cleaning and paper rounds, and that this often has a negative impact on their school work.

5. FEAR OF DEBT

   • Claire Callender and Jon Jackson (2005) found that working-class students are more debt-averse.
     • They saw debt negatively and as something to be avoided. They also saw more costs than benefits to going to university.
       • Jackson and Callender found that attitude to debt was important in deciding whether to apply to university. The most debt-averse students (typically working-class) were over five times less likely to apply than the most debt-tolerant students (typically middle-class)
   • Working-class students who do go to university are likely to receive less financial support from their families.
     • A National Union of Students (2010) found that 81% of those from the highest social class received help from home, as against only 43% of those from the lowest class.
   • Diane Reay (2005) found that working-class students were more likely to apply to local universities so they could live at home and save on travel costs.
     • This gave them less opportunity to go to higher status universities.
     • They were also more likely to work part-time to fund their studies, making it more difficult for them to gain higher-class degrees.

6. Peter Mortmore and Geoff Whitty (1997) argue that material inequalities have the greatest affect on achievement.

   • Peter Robinson (1997) states that tackling child poverty would be the most effective way to boost achievement.