To what extent has home schooling in the UK during lockdown reinforced class inequalities?
The rapid transition of home schooling in the UK during lockdown has changed children’s
educational experiences. This essay will focus on social class and why children from disadvantaged
households are more likely to suffer from home schooling. There are three main topics this
assignment will address. Firstly, the extent of parental involvement and the family environment.
Secondly, the use of online learning as a means of communication and accessibility. Thirdly,
government responses to tackling class inequalities. These topics will be explained in detail along
with theoretical perspectives such as Bourdieu to further develop understanding on a salient and
relevant issue.
On 20th March 2020, schools in the UK closed to all apart from children of essential workers or
considered most vulnerable in lockdown, ‘under 3% of pupils in England continued to attend school
in person’ (Andrew et al, 2020). Therefore, the majority of children have spent months out of school,
which increases the risk of children’s learning and development falling behind. The increasing
concern that majority of disadvantaged children who struggle with their learning and require
additional support will see this gap widen if schools are to remain closed (Burgess and Sievertsen,
2020). Douglas claims parental interest and involvement is vital for children’s academic achievement
(Boonk et al, 2018). Parents of children from middle class families are more likely to provide the
knowledge, resources and time spent on home schooling which may compensate for the loss and
negative impacts of school closure (Andrew et al, 2020). However, parents who are less educated,
may not feel comfortable or able to academically teach their children (Burgess and Sievertsen,
2020). Research suggests parents with lower educational qualifications feel less confident supporting
their child’s learning during lockdown (Andrew et al, 2020). For example,‘63% of graduate parents
said they were home schooling their primary school-age children, compared to 49% of parents with
lower levels of education’ (Adams, 2020). The statistics show students whose parents attain higher
education may give their child a better opportunity as they are more likely to spend more time with
their children, offer one to one learning, or hire online support tutors.
Children from disadvantaged families are more likely to suffer from material deprivation and receive
less parental support, fewer educational resources, and more presumably not have a place to study
(Hobbs, 2016). According to Douglas, poor housing conditions and a lack of resources can lead to
lower attainment (Brooker, 2000). In addition, some deprived homes may not have access to
outdoor space such as a garden, which schools typically have. Thus, children may get distracted
without having sufficient breaks in the outdoors to aid their concentration and help their well-being
(Hobbs, 2016). Therefore, material factors help explain the impacts of social and economic situations
during lockdown on children’s educational experiences.
Figure 1 (Andrew et al, 2020)
, Figure 1 shows ‘62% of parents in the middle of the income distribution’ report facing the most
difficulty when supporting their child’s home learning, compared to ‘56% of parents in the poorest
fifth and 50% of those at the top of the income distribution’ (Andrew et al, 2020). A potential
explanation is that parents in the middle of the income distribution tend to be working compared to
the poorest, while not having as much home learning resources as the richest households.
Furthermore, the theory of cultural deprivation developed by Bourdieu suggests learning
experiences differ among social classes (Grenfell and James, 1988). One aspect of these cultural
differences is that working class pupils tend to expect immediate gratification, whereas middle class
pupils are more likely to understand the importance of education and the long term benefits of
deferred gratification (Grenfell and James, 1988). The impact of this is that working class pupils
favour leaving education at the earliest possibility to get a job. In comparison, middle class pupils are
more likely to delay paid employment to stay in further education and get a higher paying
occupation as a result. In some cases, this approach may be adopted by the parents, their cognitive
ability, aspirations and understanding may lessen their involvement in their child’s education
(Pensiero and Schoon, 2019).
In addition, Bourdieu argues that cultural capital is comprised of economic and social capital
(Brooker, 2000). Whereby, parents transfer their cultural capital to their children, either
unconsciously exposing them or actively transmitting these values to their children (Brooker, 2000).
This refers to the physical embodiment of internalised habits and skills, which Bourdieu describes as
their habitus (Brooker, 2000). Therefore, children who ascribe cultural capital are more likely to
benefit learning from home. For instance, parents and children may have access to more intelligent
culture, such as reading novels instead of magazines and watching documentaries instead of
sitcoms. Bourdieu’s habitus also argues that the working class have lower social capital and are less
likely to have social networks and influences that may help them increase their social mobility
(Erikson and Goldthorpe, 2010). Those who do not ascribe cultural capital may acquire their capital
outside the family such as through school or their peers (Erikson and Goldthorpe, 2010). However,
with schools being closed, this limits how children with cultural deprivation can acquire their status
elsewhere on the basis of merit.
Other cultural factors include Bernstein’s restricted and elaborated speech codes. Whereby, children
from middle class families are more likely to have intellectual and developed language. For working
class families the restricted speech code may be increased due to spending more time in an
environment where they are greatly exposed to informal and less educated language (Grenfell and
James, 1988). Consequently, this could lead to lower attainment because they may face difficulty
when doing written exams (Grenfell and James, 1988). Despite this, cultural explanations can be
criticised for over exaggerating the differences between social classes and overlooking the affects of
material factors. For example, Douglas claims that working class parents do not show as much
interest as middle class parents in their child’s education. However, it could be that they are
interested, but can not show interest due to other factors such as long hours at work or lack of
knowledge. Furthermore, a lot of these points often ignore the role of schools, it could be that
middle class pupils do better because of how they are treated in school rather than their
background.
Another group of children who are likely to fall behind with their learning are those of ethnic
minority families (Andrew et al, 2020). While their aspirations may be high, ethnic minority parents
may have limited resources and less knowledge of the education system and curriculum (Platt and
Warwick, 2020). There may also be a communication barrier, as some parents have weak English
language skills, which reinforces cultural deprivation for ethnic minority pupils. Statistics show that
the poverty rate of ‘Bangladeshi pupils is 65%, which is among the highest rates, compared to 20% of
