36
8/2/2013 1 សសសសសសសសសសសសស សសសសសសស Western University Where quality come first! Department of English Lecturer: Mr. SOEUNG SOPHA Group 2: 1. Chhit Seyha 2. Seng Saksreyney 3. Norng Chanmoninich ACADEMIC YEAR: 2012 & 2013

Foundation of education 11

  • Upload
    -

  • View
    150

  • Download
    1

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Foundation of education 11

8/2/

2013

1

សាកលវិ�ទ្យា�លយវេវិវេ� �នWestern University

Where quality come first!

Department of English Lecturer: Mr. SOEUNG SOPHA Group 2: 1. Chhit Seyha

2. Seng Saksreyney3. Norng Chanmoninich

ACADEMIC YEAR: 2012 & 2013

Page 2: Foundation of education 11

8/2/

2013

2

Chapter11: Social Class, Race, and School Achievement

After we finish this chapter we will know:

Social Class and Success in School.

Race, Ethnicity, and School Success.

Reason for Low Achievement among

Low-Status Students.

Do Schools equalize opportunity?

Page 3: Foundation of education 11

Focus Question

What is the relationship between social class and success

in the educational system? How do environment and heredity affect low achievement

level? What are the major reasons for low achievement among

students with low socioeconomic status? What roles do home family environment play in

encouraging or discouraging high achievement?

8/2/

2013

3

Page 4: Foundation of education 11

Social Class and Success in school

American Society is generally understood to consist of three broad class:

Upper Class

Middle Class

Working Class

8/2/

2013

4

Page 5: Foundation of education 11

8/2/

2013

5

Cambodia Social Class

Elite group (upper Class)

Middle Class

Lower Class

Page 6: Foundation of education 11

Categories of Social Class

W. Lloyd Warner and his colleagues used four main variables – occupation, education, income, and housing value – classify five groups:

1. Upper Class : wealthy persons.

2. Upper middle Class : Professionals, managers, small

business owners.

3. Lower middle Class: Technical workers, technicians, sales

personnel, and clerical workers.

4. Upper lower Class : Skilled crafts workers.

5. Lower lower Class : Unskilled manual workers.

8/2/

2013

6

Page 7: Foundation of education 11

Research on Social Class and School Success

Table 11.1 Percentages of Eighth Graders Performing at or above Proficient levels

Mathematics Reading

Parental Education

Not graduated high school 9 13

Graduated high school 17 20

Some education after high school

28 33

Graduated college 40 43

Type of community

Central City 24 27

Urban fringe/ large town 32 36

Rural/small town 29 32

8/2/

2013

7

Page 8: Foundation of education 11

8/2/

2013

8

Cambodian students participate school as percentage

< 6 6-14 15-19 20-24 25+

28.91% 80.19% 51.83% 14.37% 1.20%

Page 9: Foundation of education 11

8/2/

2013

9

Cambodian students as percentage in schooling

Years Literacy (ages14-15) as % Survival grades (1-9 ) as % Girls & Boys (grade 10-12) in %

1999 82

2001 33 48

2005 83.4 29.3 59.9

2015 Goal 100 Goal 100 Goal 100

Page 10: Foundation of education 11

Social Class, College Participation, and National Problem

Social Class: is associated with many educational outcomes in

reading, math, and other subjects. College Participation: Working-class students have low

achievement scores than middle- class students to

complete high school or to enroll in and complete

college. National Problem: About 25% of high-school graduates from the

lowest two socioeconomic quartiles enter college

and attain a postsecondary degree, compared with

more than 80% of high-school graduates in the

highest quartile.

8/2/

2013

10

Page 11: Foundation of education 11

Race, Ethnicity, and School Success

Race : Identifies groups of people with common ancestry

and physical characteristic. Ethnicity : Identifies people who have a shared culture,

member of an ethnic group usually have common

ancestry and share language, religion, and other

culture trait. School success: Status of minority groups, Eighth-grade

samples, Gain by minorities, Dropout rates, and

College attendance.

8/2/

2013

11

Page 12: Foundation of education 11

Figure 11.1: Indicators of School Performance and Socioeconomic Background, by Racial and Ethnic group

8/2/

2013

12

Page 13: Foundation of education 11

The social problem of Minority Status plus Urban Poverty

1. The African American population of the United States has become more economically polarized.

2. Social institution such as family, the school, and the law enforcement system often appear to have collapse in the inner city.

3. The concentration of low-income minority populations in big-city poverty areas has increase their isolation from the larger city.

4. The problems experience by young black males have escalated enormously.

8/2/

2013

13

Page 14: Foundation of education 11

Comparing the Influence of Social Class and Ethnicity

8/2/

2013

14

Working-Class white students as a group low achievement and college attainment, whereas middle-class minority students, as a group, rank relatively high on these variables.

Minority of working-class and underclass, their children remain much less successful in the educational system than are the children of the middle-class.

Page 15: Foundation of education 11

Reasons for Low Achievement among Low-Status Students

• Over the past forty years, much research has been aimed at understanding and finding out the reasons for low-achieving students from working-class and poor families. And groups them under

•3 major factors:

I. Home environmentII. Heredity versus environment

III. Obstacles in classroom

8/2/

2013

15

Page 16: Foundation of education 11

8/2/

2013

16

Page 17: Foundation of education 11

I. Home Environment

The previous chapter has pointed out that: “Children’s families are the most important agent in

their early socialization and education.” Many working-class students grow up in homes that

fail to prepare them well for school.3 key sets of characteristics important to their school

achievement:

1) Knowledge and understanding

3) Values and attitudes

2) Cognitive and Verbal skills

8/2/

2013

17

Page 18: Foundation of education 11

Wide knowledge of the world outside the home through access to books and cultural institutions (for

example, museums), parental teaching, and exploration of diverse environment.

That are helpful for children when they are enter school.

1) Knowledge and understanding

But Working-class children are less likely

to acquired it than Middle-class children

So, Lacking of these things may

limit understanding needed at school..!

8/2/

2013

18

Page 19: Foundation of education 11

Cognitive( thinking ) and Verbal( speaking) Skills.

That both Middle- and Working-class children develop them with “ordinary” or “restricted”

language .

2) Cognitive and Verbal Skills

But Middle-class children are superior in the use of “formal” or “elaborated” language.

So, “Restricted” or “Ordinary” language does not help prepare poor children for

school..!

8/2/

2013

19

Page 20: Foundation of education 11

In many working-class homes ill-prepare children to function independently in the school .

Middle-class families tend to stress independent learning and self-directed thinking by:

3) Values and Attitudes

Stimulation by home environment

Early cognitive development

Early brain development

So, “ Focus on Control” does not encourage higher-order thinking or independent problem-solving skills

needed at school...!

8/2/

2013

20

Page 21: Foundation of education 11

II. Heredity - vs - Environment

“ Heredity”- refers to the characteristics are given from

parents’ genes.

“ Environment” – refers to surroundings or conditions

you live in.

Q: Which one cause the lower scores on intelligence tests

of children ?

1) Heredity? 3) Both?2) Environment?

8/2/

2013

21

Page 22: Foundation of education 11

A: Working-class children average lower scores on intelligence tests may be related to environment or

heredity, or both.Debate over why scores are low includes at

least three views:

1) Hereditarian: differences in intellectual capacity are inborn, affected little by environment.

2) Environmentalist: family, school, and culture environment are major factors in determining IQ

test performance.

3) Synthesis: both environment and heredity contribute to IQ and school performance.

8/2/

2013

22

Page 23: Foundation of education 11

So, Teachers and Parents should provide the best possible environment for each child to make the most of their inherited abilities.

8/2/

2013

23

Page 24: Foundation of education 11

II. Obstacles in the Classroom

We have noted that the home and family environment

of many working-class student lacks the kind of

educational stimulation needed to prepare students for

success in the classroom.

! However, certain school and classroom dynamics

also cause these low achievements.

8/2/

2013

24

Page 25: Foundation of education 11

List of the most classroom obstacles:

1. Inappropriate curriculum and instruction2. Lack of previous success in school3. Ineffective fixation on low-level learning4. Difficult teaching conditions in working-class schools5. Teacher perceptions of student inadequacies6. Ineffective homogeneous grouping7. Delivery-of-service problems8. Overly large classes9. Lack of teacher preparation and experience10. Negative peer pressure11. Differences between teacher and student backgrounds12. Incompatibility between classroom expectations and students’

behavioral patterns/ learning styles13. Accumulating effects of information-poor homes and

neighborhoods

8/2/

2013

25

Page 26: Foundation of education 11

8/2/

2013

26

Do Schools Equalize Opportunity?

The research discussed in the preceding section indicates that disproportionate number of student from low-income background enter school poorly prepared to succeed in traditional classrooms and inlater years rank relatively low in school achievement and in other indicators of success.

Page 27: Foundation of education 11

8/2/

2013

27

Coleman’s study: Equal educational opportunity has received considerable attention since the1966 publication of a massive national study conducted by James Coleman and his colleagues .

Influence of school spending versus social class: As expected ,they report that achievement related strongly to student’s socioeconomic background and that school with high proportions of working-class ,and underclass student generally received less funding than did middle-class school.

* Student’s personal socioeconomic background. *The social class status of other students in the

school.

Page 28: Foundation of education 11

8/2/

2013

28

Jencks’s conclusions:• 1 School achievement depend s substantially on

student ‘s family characteristics.• 2 Family background accounts for nearly half the

variation in occupational status and up to 35 %of the variation in earning.

• 3 The school accomplish relatively little in terms of reducing the achievement gap between student with higher and lower socioeconomic.

Page 29: Foundation of education 11

8/2/

2013

29

International parallels: The scholars at the world bank after reviewing several decades of international research, report that family background has an “early and apparently lasting influence "on achievement.

Significant socioeconomic: Student with low socioecomic status tend to perform poorly in school and later have restricted employment opportunities, a substantial proportion of working class child and some from families living in poverty do eventually attain middle class status.

Page 30: Foundation of education 11

8/2/

2013

30

Role of education :has help many people surpass their parent's status

College as the dividing line: Educationincreasingly determines socioeconomic statusand mobility ,college attendance andgraduation constitute a kind of diving linebetween those likely to attain high socioeconomic

status and those not. Continuing disadvantages of underclass: The success of many working-class student opportunity educational social and economic

aretoo few to overcome the disadvantage of

underclass.

Page 31: Foundation of education 11

8/2/

2013

31

Traditional versus Revisionist Interpretation

Opposite view of U.S schools:• The revisionist view of schools, in contrast

holds that the school fail to provide most disadvantage student with a meaning chance to succeed in society.• Critical theory or critical pedagogy used as synonyms for the revisionist view. The following sections explore the ramifications of these two arguments.

Page 32: Foundation of education 11

8/2/

2013

32

The Traditional View is the relationship among social class educational achievement ,and economic success ,but they emphasize existing opportunities and data including many working-class youth do experience social mobility through school and other institutions.

The Revisionist View and Critical Pedagogy Education as maintaining elite dominate: revisionist

content that elite group control the school and thus channel disadvantaged student :

1 Second rate: Secondary school and programs 2 Third-rate: community colleges 3 Fourth-rate: jobs

Page 33: Foundation of education 11

8/2/

2013

33

•Why students resist: Much analysis in critical pedagogy has been referred to as resistance theory, which attempts to explain why some students with low socioeconomic status refuse to conform to school expectations or to comply with teacher ‘’s demands.• What teacher should do: Using a variety of

related terms such as critical discourse ,engagement, and critical literacy.

Page 34: Foundation of education 11

8/2/

2013

34

An intermediate ViewpointThis chapter provide data indicating that working class students as a group under perform middle-class students.School’s failures versus success :not all working class students and minority student fail in the school and not all middle class student succeed.Lowest class position are most frozen:On status mobility in the United Sates indicates that people at the bottom level mostly tend to freeze into parents status.

Page 35: Foundation of education 11

8/2/

2013

35

Minorities and concentrated poverty:

Social and demographic trend have concentrated many child in low-income urban and rural communities in school extremely low on achievement measures.

Page 36: Foundation of education 11

8/2/

2013

36Thank You for paying attention