Effects of Socio-Economic Status

---

Education

Socio-economic status is an influential factor in a student’s educational experience and success. Economic capital, cultural capital, social capital, and individual traits and behaviors stem from one's socio-economic background.

Economic Capital

Economic capital, or how much money, property, and assets one accumulates is directly correlated with educational benefits. Areas with a high concentration of economic capital will have more educational funding because the funding is coming from property taxes. Areas with low economic capital and less property tax due to cheaper housing will have less funding for their schools. Economic capital provides access to a place in the home designated to study, resources that help promote learning, and a safety net to fall back on if family problems arise.

Cultural Capital

Cultural capital refers to one’s knowledge of the dominant culture, language use, and behavior styles. The amount of cultural capital one has is highly correlated with parental cultural capital. Pierre Bourdieu’s research suggests that middle class families who have more cultural capital have an advantage when obtaining educational credentials. Bordeau explains that teachers reproduce inequality by assessing students with bias and allowing the dominant culture to be assimilated into the educational system as preferred behaviors.

Individual Behaviors

Students’ classroom behaviors play a role in the reproduction of inequality. Behaviors often result from the common parenting styles adopted by certain socio-economic classes. Lareau describes middle-class parents often adopt the “concerted cultivation” parenting style where they put their children in age-oriented organized activities which are thought to produce important life skills, emphasize the use of language and reasoning skills, stress individual performance, and consequently produce a sense of entitlement among their children. Lower-class families parenting styles often aim at the “accomplishment of natural growth” where they provide their children with the means to thrive such as food, safety, and love, and are firmer when giving direction or discipline, which in turn produces a sense of constraint. Feelings of entitlement make middle class children more likely to ask for help directly and promptly, which leads to an advantage on assignments, more help from teachers, and less time spent waiting for the teacher.

Students with higher SES indeed tend to have higher GPAs, but whether or not this is due to cultural capital attainment is still controversial. The difference in educational success seen between socio-economic classes can be determined by the aspirations held for white collar jobs. Having aspirations for white collar jobs provided a positive and significant effect on education, producing an increase of .196 points in GPA. Participating in a cultural activity has shown a much less significant increase in GPA of .013 points.

Social Capital

Social capital is the ability to gain membership into a social network through social interactions. Inequality is reproduced through the differences in social capital that each student has. Social capital can manifest itself in different forms including what one is expected or obliged to do, one’s access to information, and social norms. Access to certain networks has been shown to be beneficial. The beneficial effects of existing relationships among adults and students outside of school were shown in a study which observed lower drop-out rates for those who attended a catholic school who frequented religious events compared to those who did not attend religious events often and those who attended a private school without access to the same interactions with adults outside of school. Similar effects were seen among denominations of other religions.

Intergenerational Mobility

Quality of education is also often indicative of socioeconomic status. Higher quality of education is typically associated with wealth and higher incomes while lower levels of education are associated with poverty and lower incomes. This is because typically in areas of higher socioeconomic statuses schools systems are able to provide more resources and opportunities because they get an adequate amount of funding in order to do so. A study by Aikens & Barbarin found that school systems in lower socioeconomic areas have shown the opposite. The school systems in lower socioeconomic areas often have a lot less available funding. This means that these school districts are not able to provide as many resources or opportunities than schools in higher socioeconomic statuses. This has been proven to negatively affect students’ academic progress and choices related to education. Research has shown that schools that are at a disadvantage due to socioeconomic status perform poorly on standardized test. This was shown using the Third International Mathematics and Science test in 2007. The research demonstrated the positive correlation between schools with lower numbers of students who were from lower socioeconomic homes and higher mathematics achievement, the difference correlated to about almost a 50 point gap.

This disadvantage has in turn diminished opportunities and college enrollment rates. It has also increased dropout rates in these particular areas. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) explains in their publication that the probability of enrolling in college decreases for children in areas that are lower in SES and is completely the opposite in areas that have higher economic and social statuses. This is an extreme problem as it relates to equality and intergenerational mobility.

Intergenerational mobility is the ability to change families’ social dynamic between generations. Typically higher levels of education increase intergenerational mobility, but when you do not reach these higher levels Lower socioeconomic statuses intergenerational mobility is less likely than that of their counterparts in higher socioeconomic statuses. A study of economic mobility found that typically, children who are born in the bottom one percent of income distribution (lower economic status) grow up to make 30% less than their counterparts of higher socioeconomic statuses. Meaning, the likelihood of these children moving to a higher socioeconomic status that of their counterparts. Meaning the children who are richer will continue to get richer while the poorer children may move up the socioeconomic ladder, but by a smaller amount due to socioeconomic inequalities.

Health

Socioeconomic status directly impacts and determines a person’s health on a day to day basis. According to Dictionary.com socioeconomic status is “An individual's or group's position within a hierarchical social structure. Socioeconomic status depends on a combination of variables, including occupation, education, income, wealth, and place of residence”. Individuals who are higher in America’s social hierarchy are more likely to bear superb health, unlike their unequal counterparts who have a low socioeconomic status and are more likely to have inferior health. The socioeconomic differences between citizens also affect the mortality and morbidity rates among them as well. Depending on what end of the socioeconomic spectrum someone is on will almost precisely determine their life expectancy and health outcomes.

Low SES effects

Due to socioeconomic status affects income and wealth its is clear indication that health is worse off for people who have a low socioeconomic status. Having a low income or being in poverty means that one is more likely to have poor nutrition or a poor diet which ultimately leads to poorer health. In addition to that citizens suffering from severe or extreme poverty are exposed to overcrowded bedraggled living conditions which can circulate disease and other illnesses. Furthermore, citizens who have a low socioeconomic status simply can’t afford highly adequate healthcare and they often have to work at jobs who do not provide themselves nor their families with those type of benefits. Combining all of the given conditions it details out why having a low socioeconomic status relays negative impacts on the health of those affected. These conditions also lower the life expectancy of those among this level of socioeconomic status.

High SES effects

Health is substantially better among those who have a higher socioeconomic status. People who have a higher socioeconomic status have tended to have a better diet and access to healthier foods. Even if they did have a poor diet that leads to poor health they are still able to afford high-quality health insurance that gives them a better chance at surviving any major health issues. People who have a higher socioeconomic status tend to be more educated. These people are less likely to partake in habits that are bad for their health. (e.g. smoking cigarettes). Smoking rates are varied inversely in regards to socioeconomic status. In a survey conducted by the US 3,349 adults who 41% of them were men with 12 years of education or less smoked, opposed to 30% of men with 15 years of education. The rates of men with 16 years of education were 25% and 18% for men with more than 16 years of education. The rates of smoking among women at those educational levels were 36%, 24%, 15%, and 17%. Due to the fact that people with a higher SES do not often take part in activities that will be detrimental to their health they have a higher life expectancy and a lower mortality and morbidity rate.

Fertility

There are many social factors that influence the outcome of individuals. Socioeconomic status affects nearly every portion of an individual's life, especially when it comes to socioeconomic differences in fertility. No one factor can account for an individual outcome, however through extensive sociology research correlations have been found between socioeconomic status and fertility align with what that means for the future generations.

Socioeconomic Differences

The traditional outlook on fertility could be broadly thought of as having children later in life and if an individual has children at a young age it is due to poor decisions thus creating a difficult situation finally and socially. However, this outlook neglects many factors that contribute to the correlation between socioeconomic status and number of children. Contrary to to early theories on the subject, there is a negative correlation between higher socioeconomic status and number of children with the elite and upper middle classes having considerably lower net fertility. This is largely because there is a negative correlation with education and fertility, in that the more education the mother/parents receive the fewer children they will have. A large survey in the United States found that women with a bachelor's degree or higher had an average of 1.1 children, while those with no high school diploma had an average of 2.5 children. For men with the same levels of education, the number of children was 1.0 and 1.7. Although these differences may seem small, they contribute to larger social inequalities that are further amplified through environmental factors, educational attainment and status transmission.

Environmental Factors and Influences

To begin to understand the maintenance of social inequality through socioeconomic differences in fertility, the differences between child rearing environments and their impacts must be accounted for. Nature or nurture has been a long debated topic in assessing the outcomes of individuals, but as research would show that only about 15-20% of intelligence is due to genetic inheritance and the rest are to social influence. In a larger context this means that genetic determinants of intelligence are far smaller than environmental determinants and completely disregards the fact that intelligence is malleable given the environment the individual is in. This means that the environment which children grow up in heavily influences the children's ability to succeed in life and thus so is the degree to which parents influence their children. In conjunction with parents of higher socioeconomic status having fewer children, studies have shown that their parenting style tends to reflect a child centered approach often refer to as authoritative or concerned cultivation. Parents of high socioeconomic status focus on cultivating their children's individual abilities and are heavily involved in their lives. This is often done through involvement in various activities cultivating reasoning skills, language proficiency and a confidence in their own ability. Parents place real emphasis on learning how to operate and interact and be comfortable in many of the social institutions that we encounter that may involve authority figures. A child that has grown up in this parenting style often takes advantages of more opportunities presented to them through a confidence that was created by involvement in clubs, sports, and experience with adults and power structure. This is in stark contrast with the observed parenting style of parents of lower socioeconomic status. Along with having higher rates of fertility, studies have shown their parenting style reflects more of an accomplishment of natural growth. As many of these parents are working class they cannot dedicate the same amount of time to their children and therefore do not focus developing the special talents of their individual children. They instead seek to provide a love, food, and safety that their children will thrive. Children may have more unstructured time and therefore gain a different type of knowledge and creativity. However, this style does not prepare children to achieve in settings that are very structured such as schools which is a main motor of social mobility. Due to the difference in parenting styles that transmits different degrees of cultural capital, it leads to stark inequalities in terms of educational opportunities and outcomes.

Educational Attainment

The socio-economic influence of parenting styles impacts the transmission of cultural capital to their children. Although each parenting style transmits valuable lessons in their own way, the concerted cultivation method of parenting style prepares children for the increased experience with adults and power structure through confidence in interactions with authority figures, language comprehension and organized skills. This then better prepares children for success in the structured social institution of school and as education is still the main motor of social mobility, the children who received a natural growth parenting style are then disadvantaged as they are not as primed to be able to interact in these situations or take advantage of the opportunities. Thus, the cultural capital that is gained by the children of higher socioeconomic status creates behaviors that are rewarded in a school setting. The children are better equipped to interact with authority figures such as teacher, fostering relationships that bolster the assessment of student’s abilities based on their cultural/situational knowledge. This creates a disadvantage as lower class students who may not be as comfortable or know how to fully interact in the situations/institution may be equally as intelligent just unable to present it in the same way. Due to this, concerted cultivation will in most cases provide a child with skills and advantages over natural growth children in the classroom. Due to our success and upward mobility being heavily correlated with educational attainment, the socioeconomic difference in parenting styles create differences in the classroom that eventually in the children's opportunities for an education and ultimately their careers opportunities. Educational achievement, especially a college education still serves to mitigate the disadvantages between students upon graduation. However, the social mechanisms that are reproduced contribute to the inequality of who can attain one.

Status Attainment and Transmission

Fertility is a necessary condition of social reproduction and status transmission through multiple generations. Fertility and educational success are highly correlated as is the environmental influences that impact the development of the children, demonstrating how the outcomes of children are influenced by their surroundings. However, to see how inequality is maintained and reproduced overtime research must look at how parents pass on their advantage or disadvantage to the next generation. Education is still the main mode of status transmission and social background strongly predicts educational success yet the correlation between social background and socioeconomic success is largely mediated through education. It is a cycle, that in order to escape the residents of a lower socioeconomic background an individual would have to attain educational success, but yet due to their lower economic status which comes with other environmental influences such as parents, that can mean that the individual would achieve low academic success. As education plays the central role in the process of status attainment & transmission and functions as the main method of social mobility it is apparent that the differences in number of children and parenting style related to socioeconomic status contributes to the multi-generational inequality. Concerted cultivation creates skills and cultural advantages over natural growth children in the classroom and eventually in their careers. Natural growth is then perpetuated because these children are not as well equipped the work force, and thus obtain jobs that make less money. Therefore will most likely be unable to provide their children with a concerted cultivation upbringing. With the inverse correlation between education and number of children, as the ones born into a high socioeconomic status get more direct attention and allocation of resources towards their development, children of lower socioeconomic status on top of getting less direct developmental attention, do not have the same time of allocation of funds towards them. These social and institutional factors coming together then translates into multi-generational poverty, as the same social mechanisms are continuously repeated, creating families that are unable to climb the society ladder. If this is then further influenced by decreasing governmental programs and increased individual risk, those in poverty will gain increasing risk of staying there continuously as they will not be able to make long term decisions that would allow them to move upward. In the same situation, those in a higher socioeconomic status would be buffered from the increased risk as having the financial means, income, and potentially multigenerational support that would allow them to maintain their high socioeconomic status. Children of concerted cultivation, along with their upbringing, are typically provided with connections from their parents, friends, and activities that give them a step up in life furthering there ability to achieve success. These mechanisms then go onto continuously reproduce the advantages and disadvantages we see reflected in society today.

References

This article "Effects of Socio-Economic Status" is from Wikipedia. The list of its authors can be seen in its historical and/or the page Edithistory:Effects of Socio-Economic Status. Articles copied from Draft Namespace on Wikipedia could be seen on the Draft Namespace of Wikipedia and not main one.

---