A Reflection on Literacy with an Attitude: Educating Working Class Children In Their Own Self-Interest by Patrick Finn Chapters 1 & 2

Patrick Finn's discussion of Anyon’s examination of elementary schools across different socioeconomic backgrounds sheds light on the stark contrasts in teaching methods and outcomes. His observations prompt us to consider the implications of these disparities and advocate for a more equitable education system.

In chapter one on page 5 when talking about his teaching experience, he says “All of us- teachers and students- were locked into a system of rules and roles that none of us understood and that did not allow for much in the way of education…” He goes on to mention that it felt as though students were being “handled” or “schooled to take orders'' to replace their parents. This is reflected by his dissection of Jean Anyon’s study of fifth graders across five schools from different socioeconomic levels - 1. Executive elite, 2. Affluent professional, 3. Middle class, 4&5. Working class. 

Similarities Amidst Differences

Despite varying income levels all the schools share similarities such as demographic composition, state requirements, and curriculum materials. This underscores the unequal treatment of students within an educational system that imposes uniform standards while allowing for vastly different educational experiences. These similarities highlight the fact that the differences she found can be attributed to socioeconomic status as there are fewer variables at play.

The Working-Class: A Lack of Inspiration

Anyon's portrayal of the working-class school paints a picture of disillusionment, where both teachers and students seem disengaged. The absence of positive role models and the prevalence of negative language in the classroom hinder the learning environment, depriving students of the motivation to excel. More challenging and abstract portions of the curriculum were omitted and teachers enforced their way of doing things, without listening to the student’s thoughts or ideas. Students’ independence  was not valued and their learning was rote and tightly controlled. Students were not given any independence or wiggle room. Teachers assumed they were lazy and pushed them along while completing the bare minimum - completing the work means completing a certain procedure. Students here were learning to do rote, mechanical work and to resist authority. 

The Middle-Class: Conformity over Creativity

In the middle-class school, Anyon identifies a different set of challenges. There's a notable absence of creativity. Students are groomed for conventional middle-class careers, but at the cost of stifling their potential for innovation and personal growth. There are right answers and students should learn them and should not question them. Hard work would pay off and patriotism is pushed. They are taught that the dream is achievable, but they need to do things a certain way to get there. 

The Affluent Professional and Executive Elite: 

Finn's depiction of affluent professional and executive elite schools reveals a stark contrast in educational priorities. Here, students are groomed not just for success but for dominance. They are taught to navigate power dynamics and accumulate symbolic and tangible capital, perpetuating their privileged status.

In the affluent school, creativity is highly valued and students are encouraged to think critically and on their own. They are given more freedom within the school environment and are trusted to do the right thing and consider one another. In the executive elite school, students were taught to a more rigorous level. Again, students were given freedom and were even encouraged to teach one another, showing that they were respected and trusted by their teachers and helping them to gain confidence. Excellence is demanded. 

Closing the Divide

Finn's insights underscore the urgent need for educational reform aimed at leveling the playing field. It is alarming that recent studies confirm the persistent disparities highlighted by Anyon. All students, regardless of socioeconomic status, deserve access to quality education that nurtures their potential and fosters a sense of agency. We must advocate for policies and practices that prioritize equity and inclusivity in education.

As we reflect on Finn's analysis, we're compelled to confront the harsh realities of educational disparities. By acknowledging these inequities and advocating for change, we can work towards a future where every student has the opportunity to thrive, regardless of their background.  What seems most challenging is figuring out how. Should the system be more regulated, or less? Is a more diverse student body the answer? Or will someone somewhere just divide the students up within the school itself? Where do we go from here?

This article from the American Psychological Association discusses more ways that socioeconomic status can affect students today.