Dion Ginanto
The notion of which impact is stronger, the effect of social economy backgrounds on education, or the effect of education on social economy, still remains debatable. Some researchers claim, on the one hand, that schools are preparing students for the emerging adult labor markets. Others argue that the adult labor markets and family income influences students’ performances and attainments in schools. This paper, however, does not answer which one has more influence. Rather, it focuses on the first notion, in which adult labors plays an important role for students to perform better in schools. The paper addresses some important trends in how family background contributes to students’ opportunity to excel in school, and how students from low social economic status differ from students whose parents hold professional jobs, in term of their achievement at schools. I also connect my argument to the Indonesian context in addressing these issues.
Family Background Impacts Students’ Performance
Rothstein (2004) asserted that children who are raised by parents who hold professional jobs have more positive attitudes toward the material presented by their teachers than students who are raised by working-class parents. In line with Rothstein, Lareau (1987) and Reardon (2011) argued that parental involvement in education for students from high-level income family is more positive compared to parental involvement for those who are from low-income families. Other issues that may have significant effects on students’ outcomes are housing and health (Rothstein, 2004), social relations (Bowles & Gintis, 1976), family investments in their kids’ education (Reardon, 2011), and cultural characteristics (Rothstein, 2004).
How They Differ?
To answer the question of how students from different family backgrounds may experience different school achievement, I identified two factors: 1) cultural capital, and 2) resources capital.
Cultural backgrounds from different social classes have substantial influence on students’ performances in school. This includes how they motivate their kids to do homework, how they read books to their kids before sleeping, their willingness to support education, and how they engage in the school’s activities. For the working class, or the low level social classes, parents will have less time to discuss with their kids, to help kids with their homework, to encourage the kids to read, or simply to read books for their kids. Further, parents from advantaged families tend to have more parental involvement. Lareau (1987) mentioned why parents from high-income families have more participation in schooling is because of their awareness on education, as well as their resources to supports their kids’ education.
Culture from the surrounding environment also matters. Students from low social economic status usually live in poor neighborhoods. In Indonesia, for example, peer groups in neighborhoods often have negative impacts on an individual. The minimum degree of parental supervision in co-mingling with their peers will indirectly affect school performance in a negative way, such as bullying, smoking, sexual abuse, and other juvenile delinquency.
Another factor that contributes to the school performance gaps among students of different social economic status is their family resources. Indonesia, which is predominantly farmers (38%), with a 6.6% unemployment rate and 11.7% below poverty[1], obviously experiences achievement gaps among students with different social economic status. Students from rich families have extra classes after school, more books, and more facilities (laptop, calculator, access to the internet at home, etc). These extra resources provide more achievement gaps from their peers who are from disadvantage families.
Health, housing, and nutrition also matter in creating performance gaps among students with different economic backgrounds. In Indonesia, most students from poor families live far away from schools. They need to walk extra miles, with less nutrition. This condition obviously contributes to the students’ performance, compared to students who live in a nice house, with sufficient nutrition, and who do not need to walk to school; these differences evidently create more holes of inequality and inequity. Rothstein (2004) stressed that poor nutrition and less family investments on education also directly contribute to an achievement gaps between lower- and middle-class children.
Finally, parents’ awareness on education has significant impact on students’ performance in schools. The more professional jobs parents’ hold, the more aware they are on education, and the more resources they invest in their kids’ education. As a result, the more likely students from high social economic status will perform better. Therefore, to create a better and more equitable social economic status in the society in the future, it is imperative to improve education quality and quantity in society.
References:
Annette Lareau, “Social Class Differences in Family School Relationships: The Importance of Cultural Capital,” Sociology of Education 60 (1987), pp. 73-85.
Richard Rothstein, “Social Class, Student Achievement, and the Black-White Achievement Gap.” In Class and Schools: Using Social, Economic and Educational Reform to Close the Black-White Achievement Gap, pp 13-65. Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute, 2004.
Samuel Bowles and Herbert Gintis, “Education and Personal Development: The Long Shadow of Work,” In Bowles and Gintis, Schooling in Capitalist America: Educational Reform and the Contradictions of Economic Life, pp. 125-48. New York: Basic Books, 1976.
Sean Reardon, The Widening Academic Achievement Gap between the Rich and Poor: New Evidence and Possible Explanations. In R. Murnane & G. Duncan (Eds.), Whither Opportunity? Rising Inequality, Schools, and Children’s Life Chances. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation Press, 2011.
Internet Sources:
The World Fact Book, Indonesia:
EmoticonEmoticon