Wednesday, December 28, 2011
Social Class Matters in America & Blacks are Stuck in an Underclass
Class Matters
The New York Times, Bill Keller
69 Reviews
Macmillan, Sep 2, 2005 - Social Science - 268 pages
The acclaimed New York Timesseries on social class in America--and its implications for the way we live our lives We Americans have long thought of ourselves as unburdened by class distinctions. We have no hereditary aristocracy or landed gentry, and even the poorest among us feel that they can become rich through education, hard work, or sheer gumption. And yet social class remains a powerful force in American life. In Class Matters, a team of New York Timesreporters explores the ways in which class--defined as a combination of income, education, wealth, and occupation--influences destiny in a society that likes to think of itself as a land of opportunity. We meet individuals in Kentucky and Chicago who have used education to lift themselves out of poverty and others in Virginia and Washington whose lack of education holds them back. We meet an upper-middle-class family in Georgia who moves to a different town every few years, and the newly rich in Nantucket whose mega-mansions have driven out the longstanding residents. And we see how class disparities manifest themselves at the doctor's office and at the marriage altar. For anyone concerned about the future of the American dream, Class Mattersis truly essential reading. " Class Mattersis a beautifully reported, deeply disturbing, portrait of a society bent out of shape by harsh inequalities. Read it and see how you fit into the problem or--better yet--the solution!" --Barbara Ehrenreich, author of Nickel and Dimed and Bait and Switch
http://books.google.com/books/about/Class_matters.html?id=l429kaN9rUwC
Drawing on both her roots in Kentucky and her adventures with Manhattan Coop boards, Where We Stand is a successful black woman's reflection--personal, straight forward, and rigorously honest--on how our dilemmas of class and race are intertwined, and how we can find ways to think beyond them.
http://www.amazon.com/Where-We-Stand-Class-Matters/dp/041592913X
Inequality : A Reassessment of the Effect of Family and Schooling in America by Christopher Jencks 1972
17 of 18 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars A Reassessment of James Coleman "Equality" 1966, October 25, 1998
By A Customer
This review is from: Inequality: A Reassessment of the Effect of Family and Schooling in America (Hardcover)
Inequality : A Reassessment of the Effect of Family and Schooling in America by Christopher Jencks 1972
Leon Todd (leontodd@execpc.com from Milwaukee, WI usa , October 24, 1998
Christopher Jencks, Inequality (1972), noted that it is probably wiser to define a "good" school in terms of student body characteristics than in terms of its budget or school resources. According to Jencks, once a good school starts taking in "undesirable" students (the definition of desirable sometimes pertains to academic, social, or economic attributes), its academic standing automatically declines. He concluded that while an elementary schools' social composition had only a moderate effect on student's cognitive achievement, secondary or high school social composition had a significant effect on achievement. Jencks also concluded that school racial composition had only a small effect on black students' later occupational status. This evidence on racial composition and occupational status is far more convincing than any evidence offered to date supporting the position that expenditures or school resources influence academic achievement.
The type of friends students are likely to make, the values they are exposed to, and satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the school, are all dependent upon the character of the student body. Jencks reanalyzed Coleman's EEOS data, Equality of Educational Opportunity (1966) and also concluded that the achievement of lower class students, both black and white, was fairly strongly related to the socioeconomic level of their classmates as long as the poverty class students were in a significant minority of the school student body. This usually meant that a student's achievement was also related to the race, or more accurately the class, of his classmates, since black classmates tended to be poorer or of a lower SES classmates, and vice versa. Jencks also concluded that when the socioeconomic level of a lower class child's classmates was held constant, however, their race had no relationship to achievement.
This conclusion is consistent with Coleman's argument (1966) that school social class has an effect on academic achievement independent of the individual student's family background. Jencks reported that when race and the economic status of students within schools were controlled for, differences in school policies and resources did Not significantly affect verbal achievement. Black student achievement was found to be even less related to schools' policies and resources than white student achievement. This conclusion was inconsistent with Coleman's findings.
"Family background, "social class," and "economic status" are often used interchangeably by social scientists. This interpretation or confounding of these complex concepts often poses serious problems in terms of the comparability and interpretation of research findings. The term "social class" has been defined in a variety of ways. Disputes about the legitimacy of these term have been many and heated and in the ensuing discourse confounding and confusing.
Some scholars deny the existence of social classes in America. Jencks (1972) stated that: The term family background can itself be somewhat misleading, since differences between families derive not just from differences between neighborhoods, regions, schools, and all other experiences that are the same for children in the same family socioeconomic status. Also, the term family background has various interpretations.
By "family background," Jencks (1972) referred to all the environmental factors that make brothers and sisters more alike than random individuals. "Some of these factors are economic, while some are not." Jencks further stated that there can be great variation in "family background" among children who come from the same social or economic class.
Jencks (1972) estimated that a family's economic status probably correlates about 0.35 with children's test scores. What this means is that the test scores of children whose fathers rank in the top fifth of the occupational hierarchy will on the average be 13 to 15 points higher than children whose fathers rank in the bottom fifth. If family income is used as a measure of SES, the disparity between these two groups will be less than 13 points. Jencks further stated that class differences appear to be greatest for verbal ability and general information. Test of mathematical skills, reading comprehension, and non-verbal ability are less influenced by economic background.
http://www.amazon.com/Inequality-Reassessment-Effect-Schooling-America/dp/0061319600/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1325135348&sr=1-1
5.0 out of 5 stars A Reassessment of James Coleman "Equality" 1966, October 25, 1998
By A Customer
This review is from: Inequality: A Reassessment of the Effect of Family and Schooling in America (Hardcover)
Inequality : A Reassessment of the Effect of Family and Schooling in America by Christopher Jencks 1972
Leon Todd (leontodd@execpc.com from Milwaukee, WI usa , October 24, 1998
Christopher Jencks, Inequality (1972), noted that it is probably wiser to define a "good" school in terms of student body characteristics than in terms of its budget or school resources. According to Jencks, once a good school starts taking in "undesirable" students (the definition of desirable sometimes pertains to academic, social, or economic attributes), its academic standing automatically declines. He concluded that while an elementary schools' social composition had only a moderate effect on student's cognitive achievement, secondary or high school social composition had a significant effect on achievement. Jencks also concluded that school racial composition had only a small effect on black students' later occupational status. This evidence on racial composition and occupational status is far more convincing than any evidence offered to date supporting the position that expenditures or school resources influence academic achievement.
The type of friends students are likely to make, the values they are exposed to, and satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the school, are all dependent upon the character of the student body. Jencks reanalyzed Coleman's EEOS data, Equality of Educational Opportunity (1966) and also concluded that the achievement of lower class students, both black and white, was fairly strongly related to the socioeconomic level of their classmates as long as the poverty class students were in a significant minority of the school student body. This usually meant that a student's achievement was also related to the race, or more accurately the class, of his classmates, since black classmates tended to be poorer or of a lower SES classmates, and vice versa. Jencks also concluded that when the socioeconomic level of a lower class child's classmates was held constant, however, their race had no relationship to achievement.
This conclusion is consistent with Coleman's argument (1966) that school social class has an effect on academic achievement independent of the individual student's family background. Jencks reported that when race and the economic status of students within schools were controlled for, differences in school policies and resources did Not significantly affect verbal achievement. Black student achievement was found to be even less related to schools' policies and resources than white student achievement. This conclusion was inconsistent with Coleman's findings.
"Family background, "social class," and "economic status" are often used interchangeably by social scientists. This interpretation or confounding of these complex concepts often poses serious problems in terms of the comparability and interpretation of research findings. The term "social class" has been defined in a variety of ways. Disputes about the legitimacy of these term have been many and heated and in the ensuing discourse confounding and confusing.
Some scholars deny the existence of social classes in America. Jencks (1972) stated that: The term family background can itself be somewhat misleading, since differences between families derive not just from differences between neighborhoods, regions, schools, and all other experiences that are the same for children in the same family socioeconomic status. Also, the term family background has various interpretations.
By "family background," Jencks (1972) referred to all the environmental factors that make brothers and sisters more alike than random individuals. "Some of these factors are economic, while some are not." Jencks further stated that there can be great variation in "family background" among children who come from the same social or economic class.
Jencks (1972) estimated that a family's economic status probably correlates about 0.35 with children's test scores. What this means is that the test scores of children whose fathers rank in the top fifth of the occupational hierarchy will on the average be 13 to 15 points higher than children whose fathers rank in the bottom fifth. If family income is used as a measure of SES, the disparity between these two groups will be less than 13 points. Jencks further stated that class differences appear to be greatest for verbal ability and general information. Test of mathematical skills, reading comprehension, and non-verbal ability are less influenced by economic background.
http://www.amazon.com/Inequality-Reassessment-Effect-Schooling-America/dp/0061319600/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1325135348&sr=1-1
Equality of Educational Opportunity, James Samuel Coleman (Author)
Equality of Educational Opportunity (Perennial works in sociology) [Hardcover]
James Samuel Coleman (Author)
15 of 15 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Family background and public school achievement, October 13, 1998
By An Amazon Customer URL below
This review is from: Equality of Educational Opportunity (Perennial works in sociology) (Hardcover)
Milwaukee Public School (MPS) Board Director Leon Todd's review. E-mail A Review:
James S. Coleman was commissioned by the 1964 Civil Rights Act to investigate the effects of the 1954 Brown Decision. The first national study on public education was conducted to validate the Supreme Courts decision that integration was a key variable in equality of educational opportunity and was in the public's best interest.
James S. Coleman, Equality of Educational Opportunity (1966), concluded that the effects of the school environment on student achievement, whatever its racial or ethnic composition, appear to come from the educational proficiency of the school student body. In addition to the achievement level of other students, the "realistic" aspirations of other students affect academic achievement. In other words, as the educational backgrounds and aspirations of other students increase, a student's academic achievement increases no matter what the individual student's social class, race or background.
These findings have had important implications concerning school race as a factor in student achievement since middle class overlaped with white and poverty class overlaped so well with students of color, particularly in the sixties.
While Coleman's results showed higher achievement for all racial and ethnic groups in schools with greater percentages of white or middle class students, they also indicated that the apparent beneficial effects of a student body with a high proportion of white students do not result from school racial or genetic composition, but from the higher educational aspirations and better educational backgrounds generally possessed by white or middle class students.
Since white students are more likely than black students to be middle class, it is reasonable to assume that schools with a higher percentage of white students would have student bodies with higher and more "realistic" educational aspirations and better educational backgrounds than black or poverty class students of color. The percentage of families owning encyclopedias, (2) transfers in and out of school, (3) average daily attendance, (4) percent of students in college curriculum, and (5) average hours spent on homework, were used to determine school social class. The socioeconomic mix of students in classrooms was cited as one of the school characteristics that increases academic achievement.
Coleman's (1966) first conclusion was that parents' education, variable defined as family background, has the highest relation to achievement for nearly all racial or ethnic groups, particularly in later years of public school education.
Coleman's second conclusion, which is the one that is almost more pertinent to his research, was that compared to the effects of family background, the effects of school staff and facilities on achievement are of minimal importance. In other words, improving the quality of schools attended by blacks alone will not reduce the gap between black and white achievement. Coleman (1966) concluded that school factors, particularly tangible facilities (age of the building, size of the library, currency of the text books, etc.), had little effect on student performance.
Coleman (1966) also reported that children from disadvantaged groups (including blacks) were more external in their control beliefs. Locus or center of control became a critical variable. The unresponsive nature of their environments was cited as one of the reasons (see page 16).
Christopher Jencks, Inequality (1972), reanalyzed Coleman's EEOC data and also concluded that the achievement of lower class students, both black and white, was fairly strongly related to the socioeconomic level of their classmates. This usually meant that a student's achievement was also related to the race or social class of his classmates, since black classmates tended to be poor classmates, and white classmates tended to be more middle class or vice versa.
James S. Coleman, et. al., Equality of Educational Opportunity (U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1966)
5.0 out of 5 stars
http://www.amazon.com/Equality-Educational-Opportunity-Perennial-sociology/dp/0405120885
James Samuel Coleman (Author)
15 of 15 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Family background and public school achievement, October 13, 1998
By An Amazon Customer URL below
This review is from: Equality of Educational Opportunity (Perennial works in sociology) (Hardcover)
Milwaukee Public School (MPS) Board Director Leon Todd's review. E-mail
James S. Coleman was commissioned by the 1964 Civil Rights Act to investigate the effects of the 1954 Brown Decision. The first national study on public education was conducted to validate the Supreme Courts decision that integration was a key variable in equality of educational opportunity and was in the public's best interest.
James S. Coleman, Equality of Educational Opportunity (1966), concluded that the effects of the school environment on student achievement, whatever its racial or ethnic composition, appear to come from the educational proficiency of the school student body. In addition to the achievement level of other students, the "realistic" aspirations of other students affect academic achievement. In other words, as the educational backgrounds and aspirations of other students increase, a student's academic achievement increases no matter what the individual student's social class, race or background.
These findings have had important implications concerning school race as a factor in student achievement since middle class overlaped with white and poverty class overlaped so well with students of color, particularly in the sixties.
While Coleman's results showed higher achievement for all racial and ethnic groups in schools with greater percentages of white or middle class students, they also indicated that the apparent beneficial effects of a student body with a high proportion of white students do not result from school racial or genetic composition, but from the higher educational aspirations and better educational backgrounds generally possessed by white or middle class students.
Since white students are more likely than black students to be middle class, it is reasonable to assume that schools with a higher percentage of white students would have student bodies with higher and more "realistic" educational aspirations and better educational backgrounds than black or poverty class students of color. The percentage of families owning encyclopedias, (2) transfers in and out of school, (3) average daily attendance, (4) percent of students in college curriculum, and (5) average hours spent on homework, were used to determine school social class. The socioeconomic mix of students in classrooms was cited as one of the school characteristics that increases academic achievement.
Coleman's (1966) first conclusion was that parents' education, variable defined as family background, has the highest relation to achievement for nearly all racial or ethnic groups, particularly in later years of public school education.
Coleman's second conclusion, which is the one that is almost more pertinent to his research, was that compared to the effects of family background, the effects of school staff and facilities on achievement are of minimal importance. In other words, improving the quality of schools attended by blacks alone will not reduce the gap between black and white achievement. Coleman (1966) concluded that school factors, particularly tangible facilities (age of the building, size of the library, currency of the text books, etc.), had little effect on student performance.
Coleman (1966) also reported that children from disadvantaged groups (including blacks) were more external in their control beliefs. Locus or center of control became a critical variable. The unresponsive nature of their environments was cited as one of the reasons (see page 16).
Christopher Jencks, Inequality (1972), reanalyzed Coleman's EEOC data and also concluded that the achievement of lower class students, both black and white, was fairly strongly related to the socioeconomic level of their classmates. This usually meant that a student's achievement was also related to the race or social class of his classmates, since black classmates tended to be poor classmates, and white classmates tended to be more middle class or vice versa.
James S. Coleman, et. al., Equality of Educational Opportunity (U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1966)
5.0 out of 5 stars
http://www.amazon.com/Equality-Educational-Opportunity-Perennial-sociology/dp/0405120885
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
