The main focus of public debate on social mobility is on how the gaps in educational outcomes between children from rich and poor backgrounds can be closed. This is clearly the right priority for policy given the critical importance of educational attainment in determining future life chances and the large gaps by social background we know exist in early years’ outcomes, attainment in primary school, GCSE results, the chances of staying in full-time education post-16 and the chances of entering university, especially at the most selective institutions.But it does risk missing out on several other important barriers to children from less well-off backgrounds being able to achieve their potential.
I was reading a fantastic blog on this subject a few weeks ago giving a powerful summary of some of the subtle ways in which your social background has an impact on both how you think and how you approach social situations. As the author notes – and is blindingly obvious to anyone who has been on a similar social journey – “Coming from a working class or lower socio-economic backgrounds and trying to culturally fit into middle-class lifestyles and jobs can be incredibly difficult”.
I strongly recommend reading the whole post, but barriers identified include:
- Lack of shared cultural experiences (e.g. places visited, plays seen, hobbies participated in)
- Different attitudes towards people and relationships (e.g. more subtext, nuance and casualness in middle-class relationships)
- Differences between working and middle-class lifestyles (e.g. food, restaurants, clothes)
- Different cultural reference points (e.g. making it difficult to relate to new peers)
- Few sources of effective informal careers advice or role models (e.g. familial advice being of limited use in navigating the professional jobs market, more limited social networks)
As the author states:
“Middle class is a scary place, full of unwritten rules that are alien to someone coming from a background where survival is paramount. Growing up poor, your brain is constantly working out how to get through today; and planning to work out tomorrow when it comes to it. It’s hard to plan a future, a route through career structures, pensions and life – when you have grown up focusing on the next pay packet, and are thinking about how to make sure you have enough food and electricity to last”
“Coming from lower income backgrounds, we start off feeling inferior – because life and our experiences have told us that we are. We then risk continuing to feel inferior because we are stuck in circles surrounded by people who constantly have access to knowledge and cultural experiences we haven’t”
What impact does this have? It seems likely that worries about “not fitting in” will be one reason why highly able children from less well-off backgrounds are less likely to apply to the most selective universities. It probably contributes to a lack of confidence amongst those who are upwardly mobile as they struggle to adapt to their new social environment with detrimental impact on their ability to reach their potential. And the lack of effective networks and advice to help navigate this new alien “middle class world” probably make it more difficult to translate high attainment into success in the professional jobs market and I imagine help explain the findings from research carried out for the Commission by Lindsey Macmillan and Anna Vignoles that those educated in private schools are significantly more likely be in the highest status jobs three years after graduating than state-educated students with exactly the same qualifications from exactly the same university
However, tackling this issue is – of course – difficult and complicated and it is far from clear what an effective response to them would be.
One helpful thing would be more awareness of this as a potential issue – it can often be unappreciated by policy makers who mostly come from middle-class professional backgrounds. This often means that debate can all too easily assume that if educational inequalities can be reduced and aspirations of young people from working-class backgrounds raised then that alone will be enough to tackle the problem.
Another helpful thing would be developing a better understanding of what is necessary to help tackle these barriers. Any ideas?
16 comments
Comment by Sam Spruce posted on
One salient point you raise is "Different attitudes towards people and relationships (e.g. more subtext, nuance and casualness in middle-class relationships)". If you examine the subtext and nuance you might understand that that is where the prejudice and ignorance reside. That is part of the psychological "power over" mechanism. It seems incredibly naive and arrogant to be assuming that if everyone became middle class the world would simply be a better place. Everyone is valuable and given the acknowledged "advantage" enjoyed by the "middle class" it really is their responsibility to stop the prejudicial culture. Your analysis is stunningly presumptuous and really quite divisive.
Comment by Andrew Manson posted on
There are many forces at work in the scenarios you describe. The mistake is to see them as representing human universals, and not a very British, and perhaps more specifically, how a very English form of social hierarchy interacts with upward mobility and opportunity in this country. These are patterns that need disrupting, and on both sides of the equation.
For me, the core of it rests on how we learn attach value to different roles in our society, and the subtle hierarchy on which these operates. This is absolutely not universal, and hence also offers the keys to unpicking it. Other countries have greater fluidity and it seems intrinsically linked greater social value being placed on a wider gamut of roles. In doing the escalator model of social mobility no longer feels so relevant as a multi-directional model takes over. This thinking has been with me a long time and underpins my work developing the http://www.talkingjobs.net resource for schools.
However to those already in the workplace but at the early stages of their career I would say there is another mode available rather than the 'fake it to make it' posited in a newspaper today. Young people coming through from less well off back grounds need to be confident about articulating how their backgrounds inform their choices, and the values they brings to whatever environment or role they hope to inhabit. They are in effect cultural ambassadors across social divides and should only ever have pride in their origins. Snobbery is worth challenging and stereotypes need calling out when and where they have negative impact.
On the flip side, decision makers responsible for replicating professional and institutional cultures need reminding that healthy organisations thrive on diversity, and that locked in codes that create working cultures are under threat if their talent pool is narrow. Mono-class work environments risk an enormous opportunity cost, as they lack the breadth of personal experience and insight to create 'the new'. And by the way, we really need this capacity to create 'the new' before our entire country ends up the poor relation.
Comment by Mick Greer posted on
Please tell me that this posts follows in the great tradition of Henry Root?
I can see no other reason to explain such a misguided piece of hogwash.
It saddens me to think that someone would view anyone with such simplistic disdain.
You assume that everyone wants to be middle class much like Victorian explorers assumed all African people wanted to be 'civilised'.
Shame on you for such narrow-minded thinking.
Comment by Mike Green posted on
I think you need to be treated for some sort of psychological illness. Your claim is rather offensive.
Do you propose black people paint their faces white?
Or should all Cockneys start speaking like Eliza Dolittle with a book on her head?
The sad part is, I don't think you realise what you are actually saying.
There is nothing wrong whatsoever with being "working class". Its idiotic, cowardly and bigoted toffs that are causing the problems.
Working class people DON'T "lack confidence". Britain has class corruption ie discrimination against working and lower middle class people in ENDEMIC PROPORTIONS.
Why don't you deal with that?
Comment by Mike Green posted on
Just read the rest of your post...
So you say the solution is to talk with a plum in the mouth and visit the opera?
How about public school class bigots are just locked up for class hate and discrimination?
Then we wouldn't have to listen to condescending suggestions about "the great unwashed"...
Comment by Paul Irvine posted on
Will the government provide working class children with the cash to go the opera, learn how to play the piano and go the places attended by the wealthier sections of society. I think not!!!
Comment by Michael Abbinnett posted on
I emphasise so much with this being an unemployed graduate from the North-East of England.
I am proud of my working class background. Yes, sometimes I wish I could just get my parents to get their friends to give me an internship (an unpaid one because there seem to be a lot more of those I can't possibly afford to apply for). Sometimes I wish I could say to my parents 'what do you think about a career in...' and get a reasonable response - not to be harsh on them, of course they care and want the best for me but there's an expectation that I will have to navigate that path alone. But I wear my working class background as a badge of honour rather than something to hide away. I think about how much it has benefited me. The key I think is in the 'middle class subtext and nuance' point. They don't like it. They'd much prefer to be blunt and to the point (not enough to change but enough to admire) and I do believe that most middle class people I have experience with prefer someone who just outright says something. Admittedly most of my experience with middle class people is academia but I do not believe I would've had the same university experience if I didn't challenge and bluntly disagree with what theorists (largely middle class) and lecturers (also middle class) thought. Perhaps it's different in a more professional setting where rocking the boat isn't really seen as the 'in' thing so I respect that difference.
I have not been to Oxbridge but I read about a story where someone - from a working class background, no doubt - asked 'can you pass the buns please' and was rebuked because it's a "bread roll, not buns". They apologised and the person recalling the story says they quickly adapted to the new environment. My response would be 'why? If they knew what you were talking about (and they'd have to know to correct you), why didn't they just pass you it?' It's about saying that my language, my culture, my experiences are not inferior to yours; they make me who I am and you should respect that rather than look down your nose at it.
In short: instead of thinking how working class background disadvantages us, we need to talk about how a working class background gives us an advantage and make damn sure everyone knows about it.
PS. If anyone wants to give me a job where I could wear jeans and a t-shirt (suits are so expensive!), do not hesitate to let me know where I can apply.
Comment by Darren Stephens posted on
I sympathise with this. I wrote <a href="http://mantrafilledoompah.wordpress.com/2014/03/03/once-a-prole/">a short blog post</a> about this at my blog, which says some of this in slightly different ways.
I too am from the North East (born in Middlesbrough, actually). I didn't go to Oxbridge either, but to one of the second rank, where there were plenty of us Oxbridge rejects (there's a whole other discussion to be had about the lottery of Oxbridge selection interviews), many of whom had been through the independent education system. I had been through a comprehensive, but when I arrived didn't feel so out of place. There were others who were sort of like me. From an early age, I wanted to go to University. No one in my family ever had, but I was set on it, even though I didn't know what I wanted to do once I'd been there. Perhaps that coloured the way I approached the whole experience. I had got there because I was clever enough to: there was no way that anyone could claim I hadn't. I was there by right. That gave me some form of comfort (and is a reason why "positive action" entry quotas make me uneasy).
Perhaps because of the pressure to "assimilate" into a middle-class life I have felt the pull the other way all the stronger. I am keen to remember exactly where I came from, the values that were instilled in me, and to feel the pride of coming where I come from. And pride is not too strong a word. Many of those values have been eroded by the predations of the last thirty tears: the bitter social Darwinism of neo-liberal economics and social policy. Our communities have become less cohesive, and many of the traditional working class values I grew up with were surrendered in the name of pragmatism in the face of assaults by those who told us we were dinosaurs and that the world had to change, in spite of having no plan for that transition.
In spite of what messages are being passed from the political centre (by all the major parties), the separation between the long-standing strata of society are growing, and the lack of mutual understanding and communication is too. The messages about growth and the improving economy are lost on many who are poorer, or outside the squatting metropolitan sprawl of London. This makes mobility and cohesion increasingly harder for those with little capital (literal, social or intellectual) to invest. I think Alyn Gwyndaf's post has some sensible things to say. The value of social capital is not to be underestimated. The calculations about where the most value might accrue for some people might be influencing decisions about where their fates lie.
Comment by Michael Abbinnett posted on
Middlesbrough here too. I read your blog post, you say you're now in a middle class profession so I am going to assume that you've moved on from Middlesbrough and living elsewhere. Perhaps that's part of the problem too. Not that I begrudge your right to move and I am also planning on doing the same. It would be easier to climb the ladder, so to speak, if that assimilation happened closer to home so that it didn't feel more like a huge leap to take. For instance, I've graduated but the vast majority of the graduate jobs are in London. London is massively overpriced so that means part-time paid and unpaid jobs are out of the question. If they were closer to home then they would be more accessible.
In response to Alyn's point about the 'what's the point of universities' program, I have experienced this situation only yesterday. It is constantly brought up that I "wasted" 3 years getting a degree and am now in "massive" debt with nothing to show for it (I'm currently "volunteering" in an office to boost my employability - don't even get me started on the jobs market in Middlesbrough). We cannot blame people for ducking out of university when the people in their family who did go to university, if there are any, are either a) cut off from the family because they had to move to find graduate work so not really around much to encourage other people in the family or b) stuck at home in a "normal" job which you don't need a degree for.
Social capital is definitely the key to decreasing the gulf between working class and middle class but let's not forget that working class people who achieve a middle class life still leave behind them thousands more who would like to do the same but do not have the capabilities to do so. I would say the solutions (in my opinion) are as follows:
- Distribution of opportunities. A healthy society should have jobs of all sectors spread around more equally rather than located in a particular geographical area.
- Apprenticeships. Let's take the "working class" connotation out of this policy and create apprenticeships for "middle class" jobs too so that there is a clear entry-level route into these areas rather than the need to know "the right people."
- Better careers advice in schools.
- "Summer camps" in economically deprived areas where instead of the working class travelling to the middle class areas to gain insight into top universities or middle class employment, the middle class go to them. Unless students are aware themselves or have parents/family that are aware of the opportunities run by charities like the Sutton Trust or Social Mobility Foundation then it's likely these opportunities will pass them by. Even better if this just becomes a normal part of school rather than needing charities to administer it: PSHE/Citizenship is wasting massive potential, seen as a doss subject (mostly watched 'Friends' in this lesson) when that time could be used to build knowledge about a wider variety of careers available to people.
- Acknowledging that 'assimilation' is against human nature. No-one ever fully assimilates; they still retain a bit of the 'old' them and that should not necessarily mean that the 'old' them is somehow unworkable or a poison to the norm (this point can apply to immigration too, I believe).
Social mobility is important but not at the expense of demonising working class life either.
Comment by Antony posted on
Re the media storm around this blogpost, I've written in defence of the author at http://adragonsbestfriend.wordpress.com/2014/03/04/if-the-coalition-is-serious-about-open-policy-should-they-let-this-stand/
Comment by Karen posted on
Thank you. My reading of your article is not that you are advocating adopting middle class tastes and trends but that the perceived pressure to do so, real or otherwise, in order to succeed is a barrier to social mobility.
The emphasis on academic education and "aspiration" as the answer to inequality is something that I struggle with.
How do you get rid of preconceptions on both side of the coin that socio-economic background, academic achievement and taste are in themselves indicators - or are judged to be - of personal worth? How do we give young people that confidence to be cultural ambassadors?
I have to confess a personal bias here: a product of 60s & 70s social mobility, I spent my two A level years in an English boarding school. I can only say that whilst the private school system may provide good academic education, the social education it provided was shocking poor. The comment from a housemaster which still rings in my ears 30 years later is "What would your parents say if they knew you were talking to someone from the 6th form college?" (My parents were horrified at the question.) But it is 30 years later and perhaps the private school system no longer drills it into their pupils that they are "the top 3% of the country" - not only a morally questionable statement but factually incorrect and possibly a major contributor to the problem we face today.
After all, just imagine we had a political class who were drawn from such a background, who were deprived of the opportunity to grow up with children from different socio-economic & cultural roots and never questioned this instilled notion that they - in full appreciation of their own good fortune - were better than all those who did not have the same education....might there be a risk that they would be inclined to think that the answer to "success" lies in replicating their education for others rather than questioning a system designed by and perpetuated by those who have gone through that education?
An education system which brought us many great things and climate change, global credit crunches and environmental degradation.
Several fronts required:
1. Communication: at the moment all these things seem to be being discussed by those who have leapt the necessary educational hurdles. How do we ensure these discussions are accessible to all? How do you make sure the perceptive, insightful views, knowledgeable views of those who didn't jump the right academic hurdles are not only sought & valued but seen to be so?
2. Indicators of national success: what do we want to achieve as a nation? "Growth" is not acceptable answer in and of itself. Growth for what?
3. Education - a national debate on what is it for, what do we want to achieve and how do we do it, again with the voices of parents, pupils and those for whom the existing system didn't work, being heard just as clearly as those for whom it did.
Comment by Alyn Gwyndaf posted on
I'm curious whether the 'fear of not fitting in' is a genuine inhibitor, and note that Vikki Boliver's study doesn't seem to mention this.
My own experience was that this 'social agenda' simply wasn't a factor I was aware of. Getting into Cambridge from a comprehensive was all about academic performance, providing a gateway to skills and work. It was only when I got there that I realised those from private educations knew how to exercise the social machinery (running societies, building relationships etc); and only later that I realised how this was essentially a professional investment aka building social capital and networks. Many years later, having gained that awareness myself, could I recognise how that system all fits together.
So part of it is about exercising the social; but part of it is about knowing that's how the process works, at an early age; that the personal and professional blur into each other; that following one's passion - and mixing with like-minded people - is intrinsic to this. If the state education system focuses on training people for a 'realistic' work prospect, that their passion should lie elsewhere, the divide will likely continue.
I might speculate that now 'social' is a more commonplace consideration, this might be less relevant, or indeed heightens awareness of exclusion or difference. But I suspect there's something of this that continues to be relevant. It's worth listening to the BBC Radio 4 programme "What's the point of universities" in which (using rough shorthand) the working class kids interviewed decided they'd get better employment/earning prospects with less debt if they took a traineeship instead of university, while the middle class kids acknowledged that it would be expensive, but you couldn't put a price on the social experience it would provide. There may be more rigorous academic studies on similar territory; if not, maybe worth commissioning.
Comment by May posted on
Your first paragraph is right on point. I'm from a working class background and I graduated two years ago and have only now realised this your point - building social capital and networks whilst at university is very important for future career success. Unfortunately for many young people from a similar background they are not made aware of this, and as for networking, it yields more results if you attend a redbrick university.
Comment by Judith Halliwell posted on
I returned to education at the age of 40 and gained a degree. As a working class woman I had been given to understand that I was inferior to almost everyone, and my degree proved to me that I did not lack intelligence; in fact I had more of it than the 'middle class', who I found to be inhibited, insipid, unquestioning and humourless on the whole. The very unintelligent whose parents paid for their tuition got their degrees regardless of ability (I had a grant). I rejected 'middle class' culture and the university system as a result, and still do. You should value 'working class' culture, not try to change it. Working class culture at it's best offers honesty, loyalty, character, plain speaking, humour and hard work. We do lack those 'middle class' attributes of blandness, smugness, dishonesty and what we call toadying. I hope we keep our culture! We may not have economic success, but middle class economic success was built by our hard work. I am proud of my roots and always will be.
Comment by Michelle Fines posted on
Maybe part of the problem is how middle-class and above react to people they perceive to be working class and the subsequent fear felt by the working class that they will be looked down on, because of their regional accent for example. Maybe it is middle-class attitudes, biases and assumptions that need to be looked at?
Comment by Daniel Gordon posted on
There are three separate points here. The first is that if you are working class and go to university then your chances of succeeding during and post university (in professional labour markets) ARE strongly determined by the degree of your inculcation into middle class culture. Therefore the points that Peter makes are valid; success in (upper) middle class social spaces is predicated upon a take for granted relation to that culture (ways of being and doing, social networks etc)
The second and somewhat separate point is whether this is right or not. Why should we aspire to become "middle class"? The short answer is that resources, power and influence in Britain are tied up with the institutions of the land and that these institutions are dominated by the middle and upper middle classes. Therefore to get on in life, to have wealth or power or influence then we need to participate in these institutions and be successful in them (back to the first point).
The third point I'd make is what is the alternative? Why should these institutions act as the conduit to success and what can be done to supplement working class culture, to allow the working class to have influence in our society (and not be socially screened out at an earlier selection phase)? Where are the working class institutions? Where is the elite university serving the working classes? Where are the career ladders in our major industries to take working class into senior management posts? We can create these if we believe in them.
Our national industries once allowed the working class to get on, to have good wages in skilled jobs. These no longer exist in large numbers and so we need to find a way of reconciling the social and economic divide exacerbated since deindustrialisation. Creating institutions to serve the working class would be a starting point. The social and cultural capital required to "get on" in these new or altered institutions would reinforce working class culture and this itself could act as a counter weight to the upper middle class culture and ideology on show in our major institutions right now. I believe this is right for a healthy society in which all groups have a say in the country and how it is run.