November 18, 2023 • 45 mins
In this episode, Matthew talks to Professor Lee Elliot Major OBE, Lee is the country’s first Professor of Social Mobility. Appointed by the University of Exeter to be a global leader in the field, his work is dedicated to improving the prospects of disadvantaged young people.
Lee discusses his book Equity in education: Levelling the playing field of learning as well as outlining other famous sociological studies and how they relate to his findings.
You can view Lee's TED talk here - • How can we level the playing field of...
Contact details - https://education.exeter.ac.uk/staff/...
Lee discusses his book Equity in education: Levelling the playing field of learning as well as outlining other famous sociological studies and how they relate to his findings.
You can view Lee's TED talk here - • How can we level the playing field of...
Contact details - https://education.exeter.ac.uk/staff/...
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:03):
Hi, You're listening to The SociologyShow, a podcast about absolutely anything to
do with the wonderful world of sociology. Whether you're a teacher, a lecturer,
a student, or just taking apassing interest. This podcast will look
at a range of issues from socialclass, ethnicity, gender, sexuality,
religion, crime, education, andanything else that sociology has to offer.
(00:29):
My name is Matthew Wilkin. Ineach episode, I will speak to someone
working in the field of sociology andlet them explain all about their own interests,
their research, and their experiences.So put your ear phones in,
turn the volume up, and let'sbe sociology geeks together. Ah, Hello,
(00:49):
and welcome to the Sociology Show.My guest for this episode is Professor
Lee Elliott Major, talking about hisnew book, Equity and Education, leveling
the playing field of learning. Beforewe get stuck into that, just a
couple of messages for you. Thefirst one is for students listening. So
The Sociology Show podcast now offers onlinetutoring for both A level and GCSE sociology.
(01:11):
One thing that we always do withour tutors is we only use tutors
who are examiners, and we alsohave some lead examiners or chief examiners as
well, So if you would likesome online tutoring from people that know the
exams inside out and can answer allyour questions and give you really, really
top advice, then do get intouch. You can email at the Sociology
Show podcast at gmail dot com.Also a message for teachers listening as well.
(01:34):
The Sociology Show podcast offers conferences andthese conferences can either be face to
face or they can be online.These are for students and they can be
the length of a lesson or ifyou want someone to come in to talk
to you for longer, they canbe two hours, three hours, half
a day, whatever you do like. So, if you are struggling with
any of the content, or youjust want some clarification on the exam structures,
(01:56):
how to approach the exams, whateverit may be, then we do
have members of staff available, reallyexperienced sociology teachers who can come in and
talk to your students as well.So again if you're interested in booking a
short conference, then do get intouch again. That email is the Sociology
Show podcast at gmail dot com.Thank you very much for listening to the
(02:17):
messages without further ado, let's goover to the interview with Professor Lee Elliott
Major. Enjoy Hello and welcome tothe Sociology Show podcast. Would you like
to start by telling us a littlebit about who you are and what you
do. Please, So I amLee Elliott Major. I am the country's
(02:37):
first professor of social mobility. Believeit or not, we actually don't know
of another professor in this film inthe world at the moment, so very
proud to be that. At theUniversity of Exeter. I was formerly chief
executive I think called the Sutton Trust, which is what a sort of big
education foundation which is dedicated to improvinglife prospects through education, dedicated to improving
(03:04):
social mobility. So I'm unusual inthe sense I'm a professor practice. There's
someone who's had another role in theircareer, and my job in a nutshell
is about doing research, but alsoworking with schools, universities and indeed governments
and increasing actually employers to improve prospectsfor children from underresourced backgrounds. Will come
(03:29):
back to that point on language,because I used to use the term disadvantaged
pupil for most of my career,but we have reassessed that in our latest
book, and we might get backto that, Matthew on that, but
that's in a nutshell. So Iincreasingly present across the company, indeed in
other countries as well these days.You know, these issues of inequality and
(03:49):
education, social class, influence onlife prospects, social mobility are things that
most countries now are interested in.You know, is quite interesting for me,
So so increasing a global topic.Thank you, thank you, And
I'm always always interested in why thatparticular area. I read that you were
(04:10):
the first of your family to goto university. I just be interested to
know about your own background and interms of where you are now. So
again, I'm very unusual as aprofessor in that I do come from basically
a working class background. I'm fromWest London. I'm a place called Felton,
which is famous for its Young Offendersinstitution, and that's where I grew
(04:31):
up. My mum and dad,as you say, didn't go to university.
So I was first and families togo university. I lived on my
own from fifteen. It's quite astory actually when I look back on it.
I was on social security. Iwas quite academic at school, so
I was one of these kids again, we'll get back into this. That
was sort of plucked, you know, because I was very bright academically,
(04:55):
even though I was from a morework class background. I was sort of
helped by teachers to go back toschool and they were really instrumental, as
well as some family members who helpedme and some friends. I lived with
my best friend's family for a time. They took me in. So one
of the things about my life Ialways say is that you know, we're
all products of many people, andI really dislike the narratives that you know,
(05:18):
it's all about me and how brilliantI am. Actually, most lives
are a product of many people.It's just that some people forget those people
that help them when they were younger. Right. So I used my story
when I give lectures now. Sothe Daily Mail did a news piece on
my life and it was from binman to professor. And it's true I
(05:40):
was a bin man, but Iwas a bin man during the summer.
It was a job my mum gotme. It was nepotism. She worked
for the local council. It wasa summer job while I was doing a
PhD. Right, So there's alwaysa different side of these headline stories.
But it's an important story for mebecause when we discuss it with students and
in d T and undergraduates, it'sa nice example to explore what we actually
(06:05):
mean by social justice or social business. That I would argue that we need
good beIN men right as well asprofessors. So let's not implicitly suggest that
these jobs are somehow inferior to otherjobs. And let's not also implicitly suggest
that being working class is inferior tobeing middle class. So I use my
(06:28):
own story really to explore what Icall the sort of deficit mindset which I
think still dominates a lot of education. And the book Equity Education, a
lot of what we talk about istrying to challenge those very dominant sort of
deficit approaches that dog the education systemsthis day. It's really interesting you think
that because I was reflecting on myselflike you, as the first in the
(06:50):
family to go to university, andthe expression caught up in here is you
know that the boy that done good? As if had I not gone through
that route and education, had Ibeen a bin man, or had I
worked in a call center, that'snot doing good. I find that really
interesting that doing good seems to beprogressing further rather than staying in a working
class profession. Yeah. Absolutely,And you know, I would argue that
(07:14):
my job is about enabling young peopleto find out what they can do with
their lives. You know, irrespectyour background shouldn't determine what you do whatever.
That is right and that you know, for some people, they don't
want to move to the big citiesand get a high playing job that is
very stressful. They want a decentlife, They want to contribute to society,
(07:40):
and they want to stay in theirlocal community or regions. So I
think these debates are really interesting.And the problem with that sort of rags
to riches story is it makes usall feel like we're failures. Right,
so you say, yeah, thesystem works because these people kind of implicitly
the assumption has worked really hard orwere really talented, did and made it
(08:01):
to the top however we defined it, and the rest of you are losers,
you know. So I think we'vereally got to challenge some of those
dominant narratives we see in the press. And I was very nervous when you're
Daily mail, Honestly, you don'tknow quite what the headline's going to be.
To be honest, it was avery generous story about me, but
(08:22):
it did play to those assumptions definitely. Yeah. Do you think it is
more of an issue in Britain?People always say Britain is one of the
most classes societies, if not themost classes. I'm just thinking, for
example, I work with a fellowsociology teachers who's German, and he says,
you know, in Germany, ifyou have a vocational job, if
you have a more manual job,it's got a much more higher status than
(08:45):
we tend to regard in the UK. We still seem to be quite obsessed
with, you know, the academicversus vocational roots and the snobbery that comes
with that. I do think weare obsessive about class divides, and we
certainly invented the class, you know, if you look back at the history
of Britain. But I also thinkclass does exist and persist in other countries.
(09:09):
I just think it's more subtle.I don't think they necessarily call it
class. So in Germany, youknow, if you're from a certain part
of Germany with a certain accent,or you have a particular education, and
you're absolutely right, they are properlybetter on things like apprenticeships than us,
but they still have some sort ofclass system. Every country I've looked at.
I think there are some what Icall status markers in the workplace,
(09:33):
your accent, where you come from, your education, and those are not
directly really about talent. They're justabout your class, okay, and it
just means and there's been some lovelywork done on this by socialogists, there
is this sort of class ceiling thatwe observe in the UK. I'm convinced,
(09:54):
and this will be probably the nextbook, by the way, is
that there is a class ceiling acrossthe world world and in many ways the
British and American cultures have influenced therest of the world. And you know,
because we have a very globalized businesssystem in this world, and I
think some of the assumptions about howwe define talent have been explotted across the
(10:18):
world. So it's a really interestingtopic. Maybe that's for another time,
but you know, to what extentis class global I think is a really
interesting question. Yeah, it's interesting. I've taught a few international schools and
there's still this obsession. We're goingto England for university you know, it's
still got that high prestige and status, even students from Singapore applying for UK
(10:39):
universities when they've got fantastic education intheir own country. Yeah. And you
know, speaking English is a realasset across the world. Speaking English with
an accent at an English accent oran American accent is seen as better,
for example, in India, thanhaving an English language but an Indian accent.
(11:00):
There was a real status hierarchy inthese different places. Accents are really
interesting. By the way. Wedo talk about this a bit in the
book. My accent has changed alot. You know, I come from
Western I was basically talked a bitlike that when I was younger, and
I always remark on this when Igive lectures. The fact is my accent
(11:22):
has changed, and I'm not sureif I did that consciously, but you
see this with a lot of peoplelike me who are what I would call
awkward climbers. We've we've kind oflost the place we came from. We
don't quite know where. We stillfeel a slightly imposter syndrome when I give
lectures. I got an obe fromBuckingham Palace. You know, I still
felt someone was going to grab meon the back of the shoulder, say
(11:45):
Lee, right, go back towhere you came from. Honestly genuinely felt
that, as well as pride inbeing recognized for my work. And I
think this is something that a lotof people relate to in my generation.
And I think I was, inmany ways the first wave of social mobility,
(12:05):
that sort of model of you know, picking these kids from disadvantages around
the resource backgrounds, giving them achance to get into a leading university.
And I think a lot of mygeneration are reflecting on that now and saying,
yeah, it was okay for usas individuals, but the system has
stayed the same. So how dowe change the cultures of schools, universities,
(12:26):
and employers to make them more inclusiverather than you know, making me
and others become sort of middle classclients. Right. So I think that's
going to be a big discussion overthe next decade. How do we make
places more inclusive. It's interesting thatyou say that you know that the system
or the ideas are still the same. I mean a level sociology students listening
(12:48):
that will have studied the likes ofPaul Willis in the nineteen seventies, and
how are Becker's labeling theory right upto Diane raise miseducation study. It sounds
like nothing's changed. You know,some of those studies go that fifty plus
years, are we still talking aboutthe same issues and the same problems.
I do think some of these issuesare very persistent. So if you look
(13:09):
at some of those earlier studies,I think they apply equally today. Diane
raised great work calls, but youknow, there's some really interesting stuff in
America. Annette Lore's work on concertedcultivation when she looked quite a small study
actually looked at middle class and workingclass families in America, and what she
(13:31):
found was that the families from middleclass background, on average get you gotta
be careful to generalize, and thishad a sort of what I would call
this sort of sharp elbow behavior.She called it concerted cultivation, basically getting
your kids to advocate for themselves inthe classroom, you know, getting questions
from the teacher, getting getting feedback, advocate for yourself, and you know,
(13:52):
doing all sorts of activities at home, doing all those extra activities that
middle class parents do with their children. Whereas working class families did what she
called natural growth parenting, right,and that is much more it's less structured.
It just I call it the handsoff approach. The point about this,
Matthew, is that not that oneapproach is better than the other,
(14:13):
because again they both have their rubadvantages and disadvantages. You know, concerned
cultivation, middle class shop elbows isa very stressful environment sometimes and can actually
actually lead to young people having anxietyand not having much free time. Right.
But the point is this, andthose studies from early on show this
as well, that the academic system, the schooling system, and certainly the
(14:35):
university system is much more throne ormuch more sort of use to that middle
class culture. Right. So itis a middle class culture essentially, So
if you're from a middle class family, you're much more likely to prosper in
school than if you're from a workclass family. The question that comes from
(14:56):
that, I think, is dowe need to make explicit the unwritten rules
of the game that often operate inthe classroom or the workplace, or do
we actually want to challenge those rules? Right to what extent are these rules
you know? Needed? Is areally interesting debate, but this goes back
a long way. You know,if I look at Bernstein's stuff on the
language. Here, he talked aboutthe restricted code versus the elaborated code that
(15:20):
was in the nineteen fifties, andhis point was that again again on average,
middle class children tended to speak inan elaborated code that's sense to be
more extended senses with bigger words,whereas working classes tend to speaking that more
restricted code, smaller word or sentences. Now, the point is here again
that you need a bit of both. Actually, in good writing is a
(15:41):
bit of elaborating umbership, but whenwe're when teaching mode and certainly in professor,
you tend to talk more in thatelaborated code. This was talked about
the nineteen fifties. I still thinkthat applies today. So I think we
still have this sort of debates,and maybe we're a bit more open about
class, and we can talk abouthow maybe class has changed in some respects.
(16:03):
But my view is there are stillthe persistent class divides that are persisted
for quite a time in this country. Some people would argue some more on
the conspiratorial arm of the social mobilityworld will say that this is all intentional,
This is how the social elites replicatethemselves from one generation to another.
(16:23):
Right, they created a system thatonly they can win. And when you
look at the absence rates now frompupils, many of whom will come from
those low income or work class backgrounds. In a way, I think what
we're seeing post pandemic is almost arejection of the school model. You know,
what's the point in us coming toschool if there's no jobs locally in
(16:47):
our part of the country. It'sa very narrow academic curriculum that can be
gained by the middle classes through extraprivate tutoring. There's not much in it
for us. And now, mumand dad didn't do well school, and
our grandparents didn't do well at school, right, so I can sort of
see why some children aren't going toschool. I think we need a debate
(17:08):
about the curriculum that we offer.It's not just about knocking on people's doors.
So yeah, in an nutshell,these things have been persistent for many
decades. Thank you. I wasjust looking at my phone. Actually I
wasn't being rude. The reason beingI asked some of my department if they
wanted me to fire any questions atyou and what you were just talking about.
One of my colleagues, James,who's a fellow sociology teacher. If
(17:32):
I could just pose you this one, he says, does he think the
working classes actually value the education thatis provided to them? Where is it
on their list of priorities? Dothey have different learning needs? And it's
the current system geared up for these. So one thing I'd say to you,
we summarize the literature and aspirations,right, have you, is that
(17:52):
all parents want the best of theirchildren. They're again I've seen a lot
of rhetoric from politicians around you know, working class parents don't have high aspirations
for their children. I would challengethat. I think a lot of this
is about knowing the reality of whatrealizing those aspirations. How do you go
about doing that for you children?So I'm not convinced that there are low
(18:15):
aspirations among parents. I do think, however, that the education system as
it's currently organized does not fulfill allthe needs of all our children. Why
do I say that, Well,if you look at the annual results of
(18:36):
GCSS, for example, around twentyfive percent of young people do not get
a grade four in their English andmaths GCSS. Right, I believe the
system should be good enough that everychild, whatever they go on to do,
whether it's academic or vocation or whatever, should be able to get what
I would call functional literacy and numacyat school. But I don't believe that
(18:59):
the current system is catering for allthe talents among our children. So I
would explore, for example, acurriculum that adds more vocational ATMs in their
serious vocational options. I think creativeskills, I alwayso think social emotional skills
to add to that. And Iknow that you know, teachers are so
(19:22):
busy with this is but I dothink we need a discussion about how we
judge and measure essentially talent in school. So at the moment, it's a
very narrow conceptualization of ability. It'sacademic summarizing of you know, which is
you know things I was very goodat, right, you know, memorizing
facts, analyzing. I think actuallythat there are many children who have different
(19:48):
talents that we do not basically nurturein our school. So in the book
we do talk about celebrating a broadermix, if you like, of attributes
in the classroom. The Sociology Showpodcast relies on the kind contributions of sponsorship
and donations. If you enjoy theshow, then you can help with the
(20:11):
hosting costs by donating as little asfive pounds on the go fundme page.
Simply visit UK dot GoFundMe dot comand search for the Sociology Show. If
you can donate, then you willbe sent a Sociology Show pen as a
small thank you for your continued supportof the show. And you also mentioned
(20:32):
about celebrating working class figures and popularculture as well, Danie, do you
want to say a little bit moreabout that? So yeah, I don't
think there's enough celebration of working classachievements in the curriculum. So we cite
just a few names. You knowMary Anning, who was an amazing fossil
hunter from Lime Readi's right on theSouth coast, who came from a really
(20:56):
poor background but was an amazing Shewas also a woman, by the way,
in an era of Victorian era thatdidn't celebrate perhaps women as much as
they should done. We talk aboutStorms as a sort of more recent example,
and that's interesting because of course hehas Black history as well comes into
(21:17):
that as well. It's not justworking class. We're really keen when we
talk about work class, by theway, to think of it in an
intersectional way, right, So thisis not just white working class important as
that is, right, this isabout people from a mix of other characteristics.
And that's important because what we knowfrom the studies is that those young
children who have a number of characterscan suffer multiple disadvantage. Right, So
(21:41):
if you happen to be female,black, and working class, that can
be really difficult for you in theclassroom. So yeah, I think we
should do far more. There's somany people in our history, right who
have done really well, and oftenthey're in the curriculum, but I think
we need to explain where they camefrom. Michael Faraday is another example.
(22:04):
You know, I did physics righta level an amazing character and he came
from a very you know, humblebackground. Changed the world in terms of
what we know about electricity. Right. Without Michael Faraday, we probably wouldn't
have the electricity that runs all theelectronic devices we have today. So I
(22:25):
think this is more about It mightbe in the curricular curriculum, but I
think that it would be really goodfor pupils. If you come from a
background, under resource background, it'sreally good to know that there are other
people, right that did contribute tosociety, saying that you've got to be
careful you don't fall back into thatdeficit mode. I not everyone could be
(22:48):
Michael Faraday or Mary Anna, right, so you've got to get the balance
right. But I don't think there'senough in the curriculum. And Michael goes
when he introduced that concept of culturalcapital. So if you're inspected by a
school now, you know, inthe Offsted framework there is this paragraph on
cultural capital, but it tends tobe a middle class notion of cultural capital.
(23:14):
You know. It's things like Imean, I'm in a characture here,
but it's like going to the museum, going to the theater really important.
All children know about those opportunities.But it's also important that we talk
about I know, football, thatwe talk about other rich cultures in this
country that have more of a workingclass tradition. And again, you know,
(23:36):
I think we tend to fall intodeficit mindset. Even the term social
mobility itself implies, isn't it sortof moving from the way politicians of it
are interpreted, is moving from thesum there bottom to the top. It
implies that there is a place thatisn't as good as another place, right,
So yeah, I think we coulddo well. The other thing about
(23:59):
this, Matthew, is, ofcourse teachers come from middle class backgrounds mostly
like professors do, right, Andby definition, you know you are middle
class if you're a teach, thatis, in believe it or not,
because teachers are of course totally underpaidcompared to the other professional groups, right,
But you are classified as one ofthe professionals. And the problem with
(24:25):
that is that we all fall intounconscious biases. Right. So the studies
are quite humbling on this in thatthey show, and when I do sessions
with teachers, it's always a reallyinteresting exercise that teacher judgments tend to judge
children from more work class or lowincome backgrounds more lowly than the actual test
(24:48):
results would suggest, and vice aversafor middle class children. Right. So,
now, I think we all sufferfrom these biases. And if you're
middle class, you're going to probablytend to rel relate to those middle class
pupils in the classroom a bit more. So you're probably just going to be
a bit more warm, You're goingto probably give them a bit more eye
contact. It comes back to actuallywork. By the way, what you
(25:10):
were talking about earlier. Some ofthe lately people are talked about labeling theories
in this or you know, selffulfilling prophecies, you know in the classroom
where you kind of make some assumptionsabout that child and then they kind of
play up to those assumptions and beforeyou know it, you're in a cycle,
which means that that that pupil willnot excel as well as they might
(25:32):
do. So so, yeah,really important to understand that that the biases
and barriers in the classroom. Yeah, I was just looking This is another
question by James. I suppose it'smore of a statement and you've kind of
answered it, but I just readit anyway. James says, if the
curriculum value system and teaches a whitemiddle class on the whole, why wouldn't
there be biased against working class groupsand some ethnic groups as well. I
(25:56):
think you've kind of answered answered thatone in that respect. Can I fire
another one? An't you? That'sall right? So Leslie another fellow sociology
teacher, and this is something that'salways got me thinking, Actually, why
is classism the least discussed of theisms, You know, We often talk
about racism, homophobia, sexism,and see them as you know, very
(26:18):
bad things, you know, interms of how they're judged. But classism
doesn't seem to quite fall into thatsort of severity, if that makes sense.
Yeah, it's almost become a taboosubject in many of these debates.
And that is a real pity becauseI think that, like diversity efforts in
the workplace are flawed unless they considerclass as well as ethnicity and gender and
(26:45):
are the characteristics souse. If you'remissing out that characteristic, you're going to
miss out a lot of young people, right. And it's also, as
we were talking earlier, it's intersectional, so you know, you're missing a
huge bit of what we are aspeople. And so yeah, I really
worry about that. And a lotof my work is in a sense promoting
(27:06):
this idea that we need to talkabout class alongside these other characteristics. I'm
really keen to say that that's notinstead of right, this compliments those other
issues, and there's a real complementarityhere. You know, some of the
things we talk about in the book, you know, could apply to pupils
who struggled with biases because of othercharacteristics, Right, The other thing I
(27:29):
would say about this as well,that we've emphasize in the books. Really
important to say on this is thateducation can't solve all societies ills, right,
So you know, I talk aboutbias in the classroom, and I'm
working with teachers to think through thepractical implications of that. It's been really
interesting actually talking to some geography andhistory teachers last week about this, and
(27:51):
we were talking about how you givefeedback in the classroom. Our children respond
to behavior processes in schools, howdo you differentiate in the classroom that There's
so many questions about clash in practicethat sort of emanate from these discussions,
but it's really important to also emphasizethat schools can do so much. So,
you know, in the book,we talk about the flawed assumptions of
(28:12):
modern capitalism, because what we have, in a sense, whatever party you
look at in the UK, isthis assumption that we can have quite wide
inequalities in life, both material andcultural, as long as schools are there
to equalize opportunity. Right. Soit's down to you, teachers essentially to
make it all happen, you know, And that's implicit in a lot of
(28:33):
the political debates we have. Theevidence points to a very different conclusion,
and that is that a lot ofchildren's outcomes are shaped by the home learning
environment, what happens outside the schoolgates. And I think in the book
we talk a lot about what canschools contribute to that? So, for
example, many schools now provide freeschool breakfast, for example, So you're
(28:56):
kind of getting into that social welfarestpaa's effectively right as a school And it
saddens me in some ways because Ithink teachers are so stretched. But then
you know, when I visit schools, I say, Lee, there is
no one else picking up these pieces. So if no one else is going
to do it as teachers, we'regoing to try. But I think the
problem with it is that all theevidence suggests that schools can't do it on
(29:17):
their own. So you know,if we're going to have a serious debate
about equity or social ability or socialjustice, you have to think about how
you address inequalities outside of schools aswell as inside them. Right, So
while I'm challenging teachers to reflect ontheir biases, you've just got to put
that into context, right, whichis teachers can be transformative, but they
(29:38):
can't hold the whole of it ontheir own, right, So you've just
got to make sure you understand that. Yeah, I was going to say
a lot of the inequalities start beforethe child's even started school at the age
of five, haven't they. Weneed more Marcus Rashford's in the world.
That would be a good start.This was really interesting. You know,
I do this kind of quiz questionwhen I give lectures, which is,
(30:00):
you know how many universities have producedEnglish Prime minister since the war? Right?
The answers won't everyone is Oxford andnothing on Oxford. I'm a fellow
at one of the colleges then,or but I think it is amazing that
only one universe, not even Cambridge, has produced, let alone someone like
Exeter. Right, and there areprimises. By the way, didn't go
to university, and Gordon Brown wasScottish. I'm not including him, So
(30:22):
just any very good questions on that. And by the way, Keir Starmer,
if he does become a crient,I think did a postgraduate degree ox
I've checked that so And by theway, I've had to update that slide
several times the last year, recurringsort of slide. But I mentioned that
because I think it's really important thatwe do have diversity at the top because
(30:45):
what's happened recently in you know,we got this inquiry into the what happened
in the government sort of management ofthe COVID, you know, that really
interesting inquiry, and I think alot of things coming out of that are
when Marcus Rashed was saying, actually, we need to we need to offer
all children, you know, freemeals during the summer holidays, and stending
(31:07):
that at the cabinet because they wereall from such a small slice of society,
didn't quite understand the issues facing thosechildren, right. So, so
the problem with low social mobility isthat you get a dysfunctional I would argue,
and certainly disengaged elite that the governorsthe country, and then you'd get
(31:33):
those issues where you get a bitof a disconnect between those and the people
they're meant to serve. Yeah,definitely understandable that. And I was just
thinking as well as you were sayingthat as you sort of move up through
through education, you know, Iteach a level myself, I wonder if
the if the gap is even morenoticeable at that stage. If I think
(31:53):
of the college that I'm teaching inat the moment. You know, the
A level students come from some veryvery sort of affluent areas. I live
and hope some very affluent areas,and those students that do come from the
working class backgrounds, I think perhapseven film more fish out of water.
And one of the questions that I'vehad from another sociology teacher, Sophie,
she says, what is the bestway to poverty proof at A level?
(32:17):
What could be done in our classrooms? And I know the second half of
your book focuses very much on whatwe the teachers could do, so I
was interested in your thoughts on that. Well. By the way, we
have similar issues in universities. Soversus are trying to recruit talent from all
backgrounds, but it's really difficult,particularly at universites where you have very high
(32:38):
A level grades for entry. Soin fact, I'm doing a lecture tomorrow
on this at my own institution,my own university, to try and reflect
on how we can up our gameas a university on this. I do
think as teachers we need to beaware of those young people in the class
(32:59):
that so for A level, You'reabsolutely right if you look at the statistics
around a levels, you've already lostmany children, for example, on free
school mills right there. The attritionis quite horrifying actually when you look at
the statistics and that then shapes youknow, the population that they go on
to university. So I think there'sa number of things teachers can do.
(33:21):
I mean, the thing that you'vegot to be so careful of with all
this is not to label or stereotypethe pupils in your class while giving them
support in a non patronizing way.Right You're known this, Matthew is.
It's very difficult. So some ofthe discussions I get into with teachers is
how you provide support without making thosechildren feel like they're they're they're in need
(33:46):
in some way right, that they'rebeing patronized. We talk in the book
about not labeling and actually thinking inthe classroom. Disadvantage is a continuum really
any classroom. It's not pupil premiumversus non pupil premium as we tend to
think of in schools, right becausefunding comes in for those children free school
(34:09):
mills through the pupil premium. Soone thing I think you need to really
think about is think about all goodteachers do is thinking about pupils as individuals.
They're all basically a product of manydifferent factors, and so you really
got to just be careful in stereotypingI guess those young pupils and just not
(34:31):
assuming. I mean that phrase povertyproofing is a really interesting one, and
I think culture proofing might be anotherone. Right. So, I think
we're not explicit enough about what's expectedat a level and indeed university, so
there is this notion that you're moreof an independent learner right a level.
(34:51):
I think that again is a bitof a middle class bias for someone like
me. You know, I wasused to that that was my tendency,
right. I think many childrenm middleclass flounders have been taught that they've been
developed from very early on, whereasif you come from work class back you
might just not understand that of experiencethat as much. So I think as
(35:14):
a teacher, you've just got toquestion your own assumptions and also the fact
that we all come from quite middleclass backgrounds, right. So, I
think there's a lot of reflection wecould do as teachers to just to think
about some of the biases and barriersthat are in cost of the problem.
I think the system is none oftheir training around teaching mentions these sort of
(35:37):
issues. You know, I dolectures for training teachers on disadvantage on the
quality, but it's to be honest, it's far on fear between that those
teachers will get that sort of grounding, you know. And I think some
of our teachers are put into situationswhere they've got very little experience of the
spectrum of society that they're actually goingto be serving. So I certainly think
(36:00):
we did should do more in training, and I think things like OFSTED inspection
should have much more of a focus, explicit focus on what is this school
doing for those from underresourced backgrounds?Right, And again I really emphasize a
language here. You know, we'vemoved away from that description disadvantaged pupils because
(36:21):
we feel that that immediately puts theemphasis on the pupil, It defines them,
whereas it's the circumstances that those pupilshave experience that might have affected their
learning, it's not them as individuals. And we also spoke to a lot
of A level students who said,I don't particularly want to be labeled as
disadvantaged, right, So I thinkit's really important the language teacher uses as
(36:45):
well. And just to clarify thatyou use the word under resource rather than
disadvantage, is that right? Yeah? I mean, you know it's not
the key point here is you know, lots of studies that I and others
are involved in, you do find, you know, one group on average
is low income compared to enough.So you can use those terms when it's
well defined to look at different andwe have to do that to find out
(37:08):
what the inequalities are in education.But at classroom level and even at school
level, I think the language weuse and the work I do with charities
and other organizations, I think weshould use the term, you know,
pupils from underresourced background. Now,not everyone agrees with that, and some
people don't like that word under resourced. By the way, I use that
(37:30):
term because it fits in with someof the board you sort of notions of
cultural capital. You know, boardyou uses that term capital because it has
an economic parallel, right, Andin a way I would argue that that
totally agree with that that you thecultural divides are as important in my view
as economic or material divides. Sowhen I talk about under resourced. I
(37:52):
don't just mean money or you know, I mean culture. You know,
it's just that you haven't been cultivatedin the norms of the classroom or the
workplace. And in the book welist actually the advantages that many children have
and that we put onder sort ofmaterial things like being you know, paid
(38:15):
to have extra private tutoring or livein a house near a school that is
even demand. And then we lookat culture. You know, how you're
helped as you know, by yourmum or dad to know how to navigate
the education system right or t advocatefor yourself. We talk about education adviangs,
and then we talk about health relatedadvantages because sadly, what we're finding
(38:37):
is that many children and those basichealth entitlements are being eroded. So loads
of studies showing that those with shortmaybe some site issues in terms of their
eyes have not been diagnosed properly andthen get sort of labeled as special education
needs right food, clothing, dentalcheckups on. It horrifies me that our
(39:01):
generation, Matthew, no, I'mcleaning you in this by the way,
you and me, you know,we've allowed those basic entitlements to be eroded
in some ways, I would arguethat we have gotten backwards. And if
you look at all the social mobilitystudies that I know as have done.
For example, you know, weknow you're more likely to be downwardly mobile
(39:22):
in terms of social class compared toyour parents. That's the first time on
average, that is, there aresome people who are upwardly mobile, but
for the first time there are morepeople that are downwardly mobile. It's hard
to get a house. If you'reyoung adult, you'll know this is a
teacher. It's really difficult for thisgeneration. And in my view, this
(39:43):
is fundamental stuff. It's about capitalism, It's about is the society we've created,
you know, creating a level playingfield that everyone can even lead a
decent life in. And I'm afraidthe answer for me is no. At
the moment that brings us, bringsme nicely onto the full title of your
book plate because its equity and education, leveling the playing field of learning.
(40:07):
Did you want to say a littlebit more about the book if people are
interested in a perhaps reading it orbuying it. So I've used that metaphor
the playing field of learning a lotin these debates, and as I said,
I don't believe we exist in aworld where there is a level playing
field. The book is a summaryof a lot of the issues we've covered.
(40:30):
So the first two chapters really area summary of sociology and education inequality,
you know, social class and thenthere's some chapters that are specifically for
teachers, you know, giving teachersadvice to how to reflect on this,
and there's stuff from bias in theclassroom all the way to how do you
work with parents and communities in yourschool in again non deficit sort of way.
(40:55):
And then the final chapter really isabout international comparisons and we look at
other countries is to see if anyoneelse is doing this better than us and
what we can learn from them.And there are some things I do think
that other countries do it better thanus, That their inspection systems for schools
aren't as narrow as ours. Theydo take equity really seriously. If you
(41:17):
go to under Scandinavian countries that dovery well for social ability, they prioritize
equity before excellence. You know,we tend to have debates about excellence all
the time. You know, theythink that you go for equity. I
either children that need help most andeveryone else will do. Okay, everyone
else will benefit. So really interestingthose international parsons. But that's the book
(41:40):
in a nutshell perfect. Thank you. And if people want to find out
a little bit more about you,they can add you on Twitter or do
you want to give out any otherdetails at all? Yes, so I'm
still on Twitter. Let's call somethingelse now X. Sorry I should say,
excell I'm on LinkedIn and Twitter.I haven't quite got into Instagram and
other yet, but I probably shoulddo. But I'm You can look me
(42:02):
up on the internet very easily.There's a ted X talk that I did
a few years back that talks aboutthis on level playing field if you want
a forty minute summary of that.But there's lots of me and you know
I'm involved in the media quite alot as a professor, so you know
there's loads of articles in The Guardian, for example, on various things I've
(42:25):
done over the years. So andplease get in touch. You know,
I'm very happy I do do lecturesfor A level students. You know,
I do stuff at Exeter College forexample. I do stuff around the world
actually, and it's always lovely tospeak with A level students as well as
teachers and undergraduates. Brilliant. Thankyou so much for your time Todayly,
(42:46):
I really do appreciate it. Andare we positive about the future? I
always like to end on something abit positive. Do you think we are
going to see changing, We're goingto progress? Are we getting there?
Do you see any sort of developmentas well? Do you know what?
I am optimistic and there's a lotof schemes I'm involved in. We've got
a scheme at the moment using undergraduatesas tutors for year seven pupils in local
(43:10):
schools. Right. I think there'sa real appetite from people to contribute and
to concentrate on this idea of socialjustice. And I look back at history.
You know, one of my favoritepoliticians is President Roosevelt Franklin D.
Roosevelt. You know, America wasstruggling in the Great Depressions about a hundred
years ago, much bigger issues inmany ways than we are facing. And
(43:32):
yet they focused on providing a freehigh education to more people. To the
New Deal where they provided work forthose out of work. You know,
he even proposed a maximum salary.Can imagine that basically no one would be
able. He was hoping to earnover about two hundred and fifty thousand thousand
today's money that didn't get through Congress. I mentioned him because I think that
(43:55):
that focus on social justice created thethe America, the Great America of that
sort of twentieth century. I meanthere's issues now, of course, which
we could go into, but Ithink there's a real you know, I
think if we got together as ateachers and undergraduates and young the young generation,
(44:16):
I think we can really change theworld. I honestly believe that that
sounds like a perfect point to endthe interview. Thank you very much again
for your time today, and goodluck with the promotion and the book as
well. Thank you, Matthew.That was really good. I hope I
didn't speak too much because I getquite excited by these no, no,
thank you very much again. TheSociology Show podcast relies on the kind contributions
(44:40):
of sponsorship and donations. If youenjoy the show, then you can help
with the hosting costs by donating aslittle as five pounds on the go fundme
page. Simply visit UK dot GoFundMedot com and search for the Sociology Show.
If you can donate, then youwill be sent a Sociology Show pen
as a small thank you for yourcontinued support of the show. Thank you
(45:04):
for taking the time to listen tothe podcast. If you would like to
contact the show or be interviewed,then please email the Sociology Show Podcast at
gmail dot com.
Hi, You're listening to The SociologyShow, a podcast about absolutely anything to
do with the wonderful world of sociology. Whether you're a teacher, a lecturer,
a student, or just taking apassing interest. This podcast will look
at a range of issues from socialclass, ethnicity, gender, sexuality,
religion, crime, education, andanything else that sociology has to offer.
(00:29):
My name is Matthew Wilkin. Ineach episode, I will speak to someone
working in the field of sociology andlet them explain all about their own interests,
their research, and their experiences.So put your ear phones in,
turn the volume up, and let'sbe sociology geeks together. Ah, Hello,
(00:49):
and welcome to the Sociology Show.My guest for this episode is Professor
Lee Elliott Major, talking about hisnew book, Equity and Education, leveling
the playing field of learning. Beforewe get stuck into that, just a
couple of messages for you. Thefirst one is for students listening. So
The Sociology Show podcast now offers onlinetutoring for both A level and GCSE sociology.
(01:11):
One thing that we always do withour tutors is we only use tutors
who are examiners, and we alsohave some lead examiners or chief examiners as
well, So if you would likesome online tutoring from people that know the
exams inside out and can answer allyour questions and give you really, really
top advice, then do get intouch. You can email at the Sociology
Show podcast at gmail dot com.Also a message for teachers listening as well.
(01:34):
The Sociology Show podcast offers conferences andthese conferences can either be face to
face or they can be online.These are for students and they can be
the length of a lesson or ifyou want someone to come in to talk
to you for longer, they canbe two hours, three hours, half
a day, whatever you do like. So, if you are struggling with
any of the content, or youjust want some clarification on the exam structures,
(01:56):
how to approach the exams, whateverit may be, then we do
have members of staff available, reallyexperienced sociology teachers who can come in and
talk to your students as well.So again if you're interested in booking a
short conference, then do get intouch again. That email is the Sociology
Show podcast at gmail dot com.Thank you very much for listening to the
(02:17):
messages without further ado, let's goover to the interview with Professor Lee Elliott
Major. Enjoy Hello and welcome tothe Sociology Show podcast. Would you like
to start by telling us a littlebit about who you are and what you
do. Please, So I amLee Elliott Major. I am the country's
(02:37):
first professor of social mobility. Believeit or not, we actually don't know
of another professor in this film inthe world at the moment, so very
proud to be that. At theUniversity of Exeter. I was formerly chief
executive I think called the Sutton Trust, which is what a sort of big
education foundation which is dedicated to improvinglife prospects through education, dedicated to improving
(03:04):
social mobility. So I'm unusual inthe sense I'm a professor practice. There's
someone who's had another role in theircareer, and my job in a nutshell
is about doing research, but alsoworking with schools, universities and indeed governments
and increasing actually employers to improve prospectsfor children from underresourced backgrounds. Will come
(03:29):
back to that point on language,because I used to use the term disadvantaged
pupil for most of my career,but we have reassessed that in our latest
book, and we might get backto that, Matthew on that, but
that's in a nutshell. So Iincreasingly present across the company, indeed in
other countries as well these days.You know, these issues of inequality and
(03:49):
education, social class, influence onlife prospects, social mobility are things that
most countries now are interested in.You know, is quite interesting for me,
So so increasing a global topic.Thank you, thank you, And
I'm always always interested in why thatparticular area. I read that you were
(04:10):
the first of your family to goto university. I just be interested to
know about your own background and interms of where you are now. So
again, I'm very unusual as aprofessor in that I do come from basically
a working class background. I'm fromWest London. I'm a place called Felton,
which is famous for its Young Offendersinstitution, and that's where I grew
(04:31):
up. My mum and dad,as you say, didn't go to university.
So I was first and families togo university. I lived on my
own from fifteen. It's quite astory actually when I look back on it.
I was on social security. Iwas quite academic at school, so
I was one of these kids again, we'll get back into this. That
was sort of plucked, you know, because I was very bright academically,
(04:55):
even though I was from a morework class background. I was sort of
helped by teachers to go back toschool and they were really instrumental, as
well as some family members who helpedme and some friends. I lived with
my best friend's family for a time. They took me in. So one
of the things about my life Ialways say is that you know, we're
all products of many people, andI really dislike the narratives that you know,
(05:18):
it's all about me and how brilliantI am. Actually, most lives
are a product of many people.It's just that some people forget those people
that help them when they were younger. Right. So I used my story
when I give lectures now. Sothe Daily Mail did a news piece on
my life and it was from binman to professor. And it's true I
(05:40):
was a bin man, but Iwas a bin man during the summer.
It was a job my mum gotme. It was nepotism. She worked
for the local council. It wasa summer job while I was doing a
PhD. Right, So there's alwaysa different side of these headline stories.
But it's an important story for mebecause when we discuss it with students and
in d T and undergraduates, it'sa nice example to explore what we actually
(06:05):
mean by social justice or social business. That I would argue that we need
good beIN men right as well asprofessors. So let's not implicitly suggest that
these jobs are somehow inferior to otherjobs. And let's not also implicitly suggest
that being working class is inferior tobeing middle class. So I use my
(06:28):
own story really to explore what Icall the sort of deficit mindset which I
think still dominates a lot of education. And the book Equity Education, a
lot of what we talk about istrying to challenge those very dominant sort of
deficit approaches that dog the education systemsthis day. It's really interesting you think
that because I was reflecting on myselflike you, as the first in the
(06:50):
family to go to university, andthe expression caught up in here is you
know that the boy that done good? As if had I not gone through
that route and education, had Ibeen a bin man, or had I
worked in a call center, that'snot doing good. I find that really
interesting that doing good seems to beprogressing further rather than staying in a working
class profession. Yeah. Absolutely,And you know, I would argue that
(07:14):
my job is about enabling young peopleto find out what they can do with
their lives. You know, irrespectyour background shouldn't determine what you do whatever.
That is right and that you know, for some people, they don't
want to move to the big citiesand get a high playing job that is
very stressful. They want a decentlife, They want to contribute to society,
(07:40):
and they want to stay in theirlocal community or regions. So I
think these debates are really interesting.And the problem with that sort of rags
to riches story is it makes usall feel like we're failures. Right,
so you say, yeah, thesystem works because these people kind of implicitly
the assumption has worked really hard orwere really talented, did and made it
(08:01):
to the top however we defined it, and the rest of you are losers,
you know. So I think we'vereally got to challenge some of those
dominant narratives we see in the press. And I was very nervous when you're
Daily mail, Honestly, you don'tknow quite what the headline's going to be.
To be honest, it was avery generous story about me, but
(08:22):
it did play to those assumptions definitely. Yeah. Do you think it is
more of an issue in Britain?People always say Britain is one of the
most classes societies, if not themost classes. I'm just thinking, for
example, I work with a fellowsociology teachers who's German, and he says,
you know, in Germany, ifyou have a vocational job, if
you have a more manual job,it's got a much more higher status than
(08:45):
we tend to regard in the UK. We still seem to be quite obsessed
with, you know, the academicversus vocational roots and the snobbery that comes
with that. I do think weare obsessive about class divides, and we
certainly invented the class, you know, if you look back at the history
of Britain. But I also thinkclass does exist and persist in other countries.
(09:09):
I just think it's more subtle.I don't think they necessarily call it
class. So in Germany, youknow, if you're from a certain part
of Germany with a certain accent,or you have a particular education, and
you're absolutely right, they are properlybetter on things like apprenticeships than us,
but they still have some sort ofclass system. Every country I've looked at.
I think there are some what Icall status markers in the workplace,
(09:33):
your accent, where you come from, your education, and those are not
directly really about talent. They're justabout your class, okay, and it
just means and there's been some lovelywork done on this by socialogists, there
is this sort of class ceiling thatwe observe in the UK. I'm convinced,
(09:54):
and this will be probably the nextbook, by the way, is
that there is a class ceiling acrossthe world world and in many ways the
British and American cultures have influenced therest of the world. And you know,
because we have a very globalized businesssystem in this world, and I
think some of the assumptions about howwe define talent have been explotted across the
(10:18):
world. So it's a really interestingtopic. Maybe that's for another time,
but you know, to what extentis class global I think is a really
interesting question. Yeah, it's interesting. I've taught a few international schools and
there's still this obsession. We're goingto England for university you know, it's
still got that high prestige and status, even students from Singapore applying for UK
(10:39):
universities when they've got fantastic education intheir own country. Yeah. And you
know, speaking English is a realasset across the world. Speaking English with
an accent at an English accent oran American accent is seen as better,
for example, in India, thanhaving an English language but an Indian accent.
(11:00):
There was a real status hierarchy inthese different places. Accents are really
interesting. By the way. Wedo talk about this a bit in the
book. My accent has changed alot. You know, I come from
Western I was basically talked a bitlike that when I was younger, and
I always remark on this when Igive lectures. The fact is my accent
(11:22):
has changed, and I'm not sureif I did that consciously, but you
see this with a lot of peoplelike me who are what I would call
awkward climbers. We've we've kind oflost the place we came from. We
don't quite know where. We stillfeel a slightly imposter syndrome when I give
lectures. I got an obe fromBuckingham Palace. You know, I still
felt someone was going to grab meon the back of the shoulder, say
(11:45):
Lee, right, go back towhere you came from. Honestly genuinely felt
that, as well as pride inbeing recognized for my work. And I
think this is something that a lotof people relate to in my generation.
And I think I was, inmany ways the first wave of social mobility,
(12:05):
that sort of model of you know, picking these kids from disadvantages around
the resource backgrounds, giving them achance to get into a leading university.
And I think a lot of mygeneration are reflecting on that now and saying,
yeah, it was okay for usas individuals, but the system has
stayed the same. So how dowe change the cultures of schools, universities,
(12:26):
and employers to make them more inclusiverather than you know, making me
and others become sort of middle classclients. Right. So I think that's
going to be a big discussion overthe next decade. How do we make
places more inclusive. It's interesting thatyou say that you know that the system
or the ideas are still the same. I mean a level sociology students listening
(12:48):
that will have studied the likes ofPaul Willis in the nineteen seventies, and
how are Becker's labeling theory right upto Diane raise miseducation study. It sounds
like nothing's changed. You know,some of those studies go that fifty plus
years, are we still talking aboutthe same issues and the same problems.
I do think some of these issuesare very persistent. So if you look
(13:09):
at some of those earlier studies,I think they apply equally today. Diane
raised great work calls, but youknow, there's some really interesting stuff in
America. Annette Lore's work on concertedcultivation when she looked quite a small study
actually looked at middle class and workingclass families in America, and what she
(13:31):
found was that the families from middleclass background, on average get you gotta
be careful to generalize, and thishad a sort of what I would call
this sort of sharp elbow behavior.She called it concerted cultivation, basically getting
your kids to advocate for themselves inthe classroom, you know, getting questions
from the teacher, getting getting feedback, advocate for yourself, and you know,
(13:52):
doing all sorts of activities at home, doing all those extra activities that
middle class parents do with their children. Whereas working class families did what she
called natural growth parenting, right,and that is much more it's less structured.
It just I call it the handsoff approach. The point about this,
Matthew, is that not that oneapproach is better than the other,
(14:13):
because again they both have their rubadvantages and disadvantages. You know, concerned
cultivation, middle class shop elbows isa very stressful environment sometimes and can actually
actually lead to young people having anxietyand not having much free time. Right.
But the point is this, andthose studies from early on show this
as well, that the academic system, the schooling system, and certainly the
(14:35):
university system is much more throne ormuch more sort of use to that middle
class culture. Right. So itis a middle class culture essentially, So
if you're from a middle class family, you're much more likely to prosper in
school than if you're from a workclass family. The question that comes from
(14:56):
that, I think, is dowe need to make explicit the unwritten rules
of the game that often operate inthe classroom or the workplace, or do
we actually want to challenge those rules? Right to what extent are these rules
you know? Needed? Is areally interesting debate, but this goes back
a long way. You know,if I look at Bernstein's stuff on the
language. Here, he talked aboutthe restricted code versus the elaborated code that
(15:20):
was in the nineteen fifties, andhis point was that again again on average,
middle class children tended to speak inan elaborated code that's sense to be
more extended senses with bigger words,whereas working classes tend to speaking that more
restricted code, smaller word or sentences. Now, the point is here again
that you need a bit of both. Actually, in good writing is a
(15:41):
bit of elaborating umbership, but whenwe're when teaching mode and certainly in professor,
you tend to talk more in thatelaborated code. This was talked about
the nineteen fifties. I still thinkthat applies today. So I think we
still have this sort of debates,and maybe we're a bit more open about
class, and we can talk abouthow maybe class has changed in some respects.
(16:03):
But my view is there are stillthe persistent class divides that are persisted
for quite a time in this country. Some people would argue some more on
the conspiratorial arm of the social mobilityworld will say that this is all intentional,
This is how the social elites replicatethemselves from one generation to another.
(16:23):
Right, they created a system thatonly they can win. And when you
look at the absence rates now frompupils, many of whom will come from
those low income or work class backgrounds. In a way, I think what
we're seeing post pandemic is almost arejection of the school model. You know,
what's the point in us coming toschool if there's no jobs locally in
(16:47):
our part of the country. It'sa very narrow academic curriculum that can be
gained by the middle classes through extraprivate tutoring. There's not much in it
for us. And now, mumand dad didn't do well school, and
our grandparents didn't do well at school, right, so I can sort of
see why some children aren't going toschool. I think we need a debate
(17:08):
about the curriculum that we offer.It's not just about knocking on people's doors.
So yeah, in an nutshell,these things have been persistent for many
decades. Thank you. I wasjust looking at my phone. Actually I
wasn't being rude. The reason beingI asked some of my department if they
wanted me to fire any questions atyou and what you were just talking about.
One of my colleagues, James,who's a fellow sociology teacher. If
(17:32):
I could just pose you this one, he says, does he think the
working classes actually value the education thatis provided to them? Where is it
on their list of priorities? Dothey have different learning needs? And it's
the current system geared up for these. So one thing I'd say to you,
we summarize the literature and aspirations,right, have you, is that
(17:52):
all parents want the best of theirchildren. They're again I've seen a lot
of rhetoric from politicians around you know, working class parents don't have high aspirations
for their children. I would challengethat. I think a lot of this
is about knowing the reality of whatrealizing those aspirations. How do you go
about doing that for you children?So I'm not convinced that there are low
(18:15):
aspirations among parents. I do think, however, that the education system as
it's currently organized does not fulfill allthe needs of all our children. Why
do I say that, Well,if you look at the annual results of
(18:36):
GCSS, for example, around twentyfive percent of young people do not get
a grade four in their English andmaths GCSS. Right, I believe the
system should be good enough that everychild, whatever they go on to do,
whether it's academic or vocation or whatever, should be able to get what
I would call functional literacy and numacyat school. But I don't believe that
(18:59):
the current system is catering for allthe talents among our children. So I
would explore, for example, acurriculum that adds more vocational ATMs in their
serious vocational options. I think creativeskills, I alwayso think social emotional skills
to add to that. And Iknow that you know, teachers are so
(19:22):
busy with this is but I dothink we need a discussion about how we
judge and measure essentially talent in school. So at the moment, it's a
very narrow conceptualization of ability. It'sacademic summarizing of you know, which is
you know things I was very goodat, right, you know, memorizing
facts, analyzing. I think actuallythat there are many children who have different
(19:48):
talents that we do not basically nurturein our school. So in the book
we do talk about celebrating a broadermix, if you like, of attributes
in the classroom. The Sociology Showpodcast relies on the kind contributions of sponsorship
and donations. If you enjoy theshow, then you can help with the
(20:11):
hosting costs by donating as little asfive pounds on the go fundme page.
Simply visit UK dot GoFundMe dot comand search for the Sociology Show. If
you can donate, then you willbe sent a Sociology Show pen as a
small thank you for your continued supportof the show. And you also mentioned
(20:32):
about celebrating working class figures and popularculture as well, Danie, do you
want to say a little bit moreabout that? So yeah, I don't
think there's enough celebration of working classachievements in the curriculum. So we cite
just a few names. You knowMary Anning, who was an amazing fossil
hunter from Lime Readi's right on theSouth coast, who came from a really
(20:56):
poor background but was an amazing Shewas also a woman, by the way,
in an era of Victorian era thatdidn't celebrate perhaps women as much as
they should done. We talk aboutStorms as a sort of more recent example,
and that's interesting because of course hehas Black history as well comes into
(21:17):
that as well. It's not justworking class. We're really keen when we
talk about work class, by theway, to think of it in an
intersectional way, right, So thisis not just white working class important as
that is, right, this isabout people from a mix of other characteristics.
And that's important because what we knowfrom the studies is that those young
children who have a number of characterscan suffer multiple disadvantage. Right, So
(21:41):
if you happen to be female,black, and working class, that can
be really difficult for you in theclassroom. So yeah, I think we
should do far more. There's somany people in our history, right who
have done really well, and oftenthey're in the curriculum, but I think
we need to explain where they camefrom. Michael Faraday is another example.
(22:04):
You know, I did physics righta level an amazing character and he came
from a very you know, humblebackground. Changed the world in terms of
what we know about electricity. Right. Without Michael Faraday, we probably wouldn't
have the electricity that runs all theelectronic devices we have today. So I
(22:25):
think this is more about It mightbe in the curricular curriculum, but I
think that it would be really goodfor pupils. If you come from a
background, under resource background, it'sreally good to know that there are other
people, right that did contribute tosociety, saying that you've got to be
careful you don't fall back into thatdeficit mode. I not everyone could be
(22:48):
Michael Faraday or Mary Anna, right, so you've got to get the balance
right. But I don't think there'senough in the curriculum. And Michael goes
when he introduced that concept of culturalcapital. So if you're inspected by a
school now, you know, inthe Offsted framework there is this paragraph on
cultural capital, but it tends tobe a middle class notion of cultural capital.
(23:14):
You know. It's things like Imean, I'm in a characture here,
but it's like going to the museum, going to the theater really important.
All children know about those opportunities.But it's also important that we talk
about I know, football, thatwe talk about other rich cultures in this
country that have more of a workingclass tradition. And again, you know,
(23:36):
I think we tend to fall intodeficit mindset. Even the term social
mobility itself implies, isn't it sortof moving from the way politicians of it
are interpreted, is moving from thesum there bottom to the top. It
implies that there is a place thatisn't as good as another place, right,
So yeah, I think we coulddo well. The other thing about
(23:59):
this, Matthew, is, ofcourse teachers come from middle class backgrounds mostly
like professors do, right, Andby definition, you know you are middle
class if you're a teach, thatis, in believe it or not,
because teachers are of course totally underpaidcompared to the other professional groups, right,
But you are classified as one ofthe professionals. And the problem with
(24:25):
that is that we all fall intounconscious biases. Right. So the studies
are quite humbling on this in thatthey show, and when I do sessions
with teachers, it's always a reallyinteresting exercise that teacher judgments tend to judge
children from more work class or lowincome backgrounds more lowly than the actual test
(24:48):
results would suggest, and vice aversafor middle class children. Right. So,
now, I think we all sufferfrom these biases. And if you're
middle class, you're going to probablytend to rel relate to those middle class
pupils in the classroom a bit more. So you're probably just going to be
a bit more warm, You're goingto probably give them a bit more eye
contact. It comes back to actuallywork. By the way, what you
(25:10):
were talking about earlier. Some ofthe lately people are talked about labeling theories
in this or you know, selffulfilling prophecies, you know in the classroom
where you kind of make some assumptionsabout that child and then they kind of
play up to those assumptions and beforeyou know it, you're in a cycle,
which means that that that pupil willnot excel as well as they might
(25:32):
do. So so, yeah,really important to understand that that the biases
and barriers in the classroom. Yeah, I was just looking This is another
question by James. I suppose it'smore of a statement and you've kind of
answered it, but I just readit anyway. James says, if the
curriculum value system and teaches a whitemiddle class on the whole, why wouldn't
there be biased against working class groupsand some ethnic groups as well. I
(25:56):
think you've kind of answered answered thatone in that respect. Can I fire
another one? An't you? That'sall right? So Leslie another fellow sociology
teacher, and this is something that'salways got me thinking, Actually, why
is classism the least discussed of theisms, You know, We often talk
about racism, homophobia, sexism,and see them as you know, very
(26:18):
bad things, you know, interms of how they're judged. But classism
doesn't seem to quite fall into thatsort of severity, if that makes sense.
Yeah, it's almost become a taboosubject in many of these debates.
And that is a real pity becauseI think that, like diversity efforts in
the workplace are flawed unless they considerclass as well as ethnicity and gender and
(26:45):
are the characteristics souse. If you'remissing out that characteristic, you're going to
miss out a lot of young people, right. And it's also, as
we were talking earlier, it's intersectional, so you know, you're missing a
huge bit of what we are aspeople. And so yeah, I really
worry about that. And a lotof my work is in a sense promoting
(27:06):
this idea that we need to talkabout class alongside these other characteristics. I'm
really keen to say that that's notinstead of right, this compliments those other
issues, and there's a real complementarityhere. You know, some of the
things we talk about in the book, you know, could apply to pupils
who struggled with biases because of othercharacteristics, Right, The other thing I
(27:29):
would say about this as well,that we've emphasize in the books. Really
important to say on this is thateducation can't solve all societies ills, right,
So you know, I talk aboutbias in the classroom, and I'm
working with teachers to think through thepractical implications of that. It's been really
interesting actually talking to some geography andhistory teachers last week about this, and
(27:51):
we were talking about how you givefeedback in the classroom. Our children respond
to behavior processes in schools, howdo you differentiate in the classroom that There's
so many questions about clash in practicethat sort of emanate from these discussions,
but it's really important to also emphasizethat schools can do so much. So,
you know, in the book,we talk about the flawed assumptions of
(28:12):
modern capitalism, because what we have, in a sense, whatever party you
look at in the UK, isthis assumption that we can have quite wide
inequalities in life, both material andcultural, as long as schools are there
to equalize opportunity. Right. Soit's down to you, teachers essentially to
make it all happen, you know, And that's implicit in a lot of
(28:33):
the political debates we have. Theevidence points to a very different conclusion,
and that is that a lot ofchildren's outcomes are shaped by the home learning
environment, what happens outside the schoolgates. And I think in the book
we talk a lot about what canschools contribute to that? So, for
example, many schools now provide freeschool breakfast, for example, So you're
(28:56):
kind of getting into that social welfarestpaa's effectively right as a school And it
saddens me in some ways because Ithink teachers are so stretched. But then
you know, when I visit schools, I say, Lee, there is
no one else picking up these pieces. So if no one else is going
to do it as teachers, we'regoing to try. But I think the
problem with it is that all theevidence suggests that schools can't do it on
(29:17):
their own. So you know,if we're going to have a serious debate
about equity or social ability or socialjustice, you have to think about how
you address inequalities outside of schools aswell as inside them. Right, So
while I'm challenging teachers to reflect ontheir biases, you've just got to put
that into context, right, whichis teachers can be transformative, but they
(29:38):
can't hold the whole of it ontheir own, right, So you've just
got to make sure you understand that. Yeah, I was going to say
a lot of the inequalities start beforethe child's even started school at the age
of five, haven't they. Weneed more Marcus Rashford's in the world.
That would be a good start.This was really interesting. You know,
I do this kind of quiz questionwhen I give lectures, which is,
(30:00):
you know how many universities have producedEnglish Prime minister since the war? Right?
The answers won't everyone is Oxford andnothing on Oxford. I'm a fellow
at one of the colleges then,or but I think it is amazing that
only one universe, not even Cambridge, has produced, let alone someone like
Exeter. Right, and there areprimises. By the way, didn't go
to university, and Gordon Brown wasScottish. I'm not including him, So
(30:22):
just any very good questions on that. And by the way, Keir Starmer,
if he does become a crient,I think did a postgraduate degree ox
I've checked that so And by theway, I've had to update that slide
several times the last year, recurringsort of slide. But I mentioned that
because I think it's really important thatwe do have diversity at the top because
(30:45):
what's happened recently in you know,we got this inquiry into the what happened
in the government sort of management ofthe COVID, you know, that really
interesting inquiry, and I think alot of things coming out of that are
when Marcus Rashed was saying, actually, we need to we need to offer
all children, you know, freemeals during the summer holidays, and stending
(31:07):
that at the cabinet because they wereall from such a small slice of society,
didn't quite understand the issues facing thosechildren, right. So, so
the problem with low social mobility isthat you get a dysfunctional I would argue,
and certainly disengaged elite that the governorsthe country, and then you'd get
(31:33):
those issues where you get a bitof a disconnect between those and the people
they're meant to serve. Yeah,definitely understandable that. And I was just
thinking as well as you were sayingthat as you sort of move up through
through education, you know, Iteach a level myself, I wonder if
the if the gap is even morenoticeable at that stage. If I think
(31:53):
of the college that I'm teaching inat the moment. You know, the
A level students come from some veryvery sort of affluent areas. I live
and hope some very affluent areas,and those students that do come from the
working class backgrounds, I think perhapseven film more fish out of water.
And one of the questions that I'vehad from another sociology teacher, Sophie,
she says, what is the bestway to poverty proof at A level?
(32:17):
What could be done in our classrooms? And I know the second half of
your book focuses very much on whatwe the teachers could do, so I
was interested in your thoughts on that. Well. By the way, we
have similar issues in universities. Soversus are trying to recruit talent from all
backgrounds, but it's really difficult,particularly at universites where you have very high
(32:38):
A level grades for entry. Soin fact, I'm doing a lecture tomorrow
on this at my own institution,my own university, to try and reflect
on how we can up our gameas a university on this. I do
think as teachers we need to beaware of those young people in the class
(32:59):
that so for A level, You'reabsolutely right if you look at the statistics
around a levels, you've already lostmany children, for example, on free
school mills right there. The attritionis quite horrifying actually when you look at
the statistics and that then shapes youknow, the population that they go on
to university. So I think there'sa number of things teachers can do.
(33:21):
I mean, the thing that you'vegot to be so careful of with all
this is not to label or stereotypethe pupils in your class while giving them
support in a non patronizing way.Right You're known this, Matthew is.
It's very difficult. So some ofthe discussions I get into with teachers is
how you provide support without making thosechildren feel like they're they're they're in need
(33:46):
in some way right, that they'rebeing patronized. We talk in the book
about not labeling and actually thinking inthe classroom. Disadvantage is a continuum really
any classroom. It's not pupil premiumversus non pupil premium as we tend to
think of in schools, right becausefunding comes in for those children free school
(34:09):
mills through the pupil premium. Soone thing I think you need to really
think about is think about all goodteachers do is thinking about pupils as individuals.
They're all basically a product of manydifferent factors, and so you really
got to just be careful in stereotypingI guess those young pupils and just not
(34:31):
assuming. I mean that phrase povertyproofing is a really interesting one, and
I think culture proofing might be anotherone. Right. So, I think
we're not explicit enough about what's expectedat a level and indeed university, so
there is this notion that you're moreof an independent learner right a level.
(34:51):
I think that again is a bitof a middle class bias for someone like
me. You know, I wasused to that that was my tendency,
right. I think many childrenm middleclass flounders have been taught that they've been
developed from very early on, whereasif you come from work class back you
might just not understand that of experiencethat as much. So I think as
(35:14):
a teacher, you've just got toquestion your own assumptions and also the fact
that we all come from quite middleclass backgrounds, right. So, I
think there's a lot of reflection wecould do as teachers to just to think
about some of the biases and barriersthat are in cost of the problem.
I think the system is none oftheir training around teaching mentions these sort of
(35:37):
issues. You know, I dolectures for training teachers on disadvantage on the
quality, but it's to be honest, it's far on fear between that those
teachers will get that sort of grounding, you know. And I think some
of our teachers are put into situationswhere they've got very little experience of the
spectrum of society that they're actually goingto be serving. So I certainly think
(36:00):
we did should do more in training, and I think things like OFSTED inspection
should have much more of a focus, explicit focus on what is this school
doing for those from underresourced backgrounds?Right, And again I really emphasize a
language here. You know, we'vemoved away from that description disadvantaged pupils because
(36:21):
we feel that that immediately puts theemphasis on the pupil, It defines them,
whereas it's the circumstances that those pupilshave experience that might have affected their
learning, it's not them as individuals. And we also spoke to a lot
of A level students who said,I don't particularly want to be labeled as
disadvantaged, right, So I thinkit's really important the language teacher uses as
(36:45):
well. And just to clarify thatyou use the word under resource rather than
disadvantage, is that right? Yeah? I mean, you know it's not
the key point here is you know, lots of studies that I and others
are involved in, you do find, you know, one group on average
is low income compared to enough.So you can use those terms when it's
well defined to look at different andwe have to do that to find out
(37:08):
what the inequalities are in education.But at classroom level and even at school
level, I think the language weuse and the work I do with charities
and other organizations, I think weshould use the term, you know,
pupils from underresourced background. Now,not everyone agrees with that, and some
people don't like that word under resourced. By the way, I use that
(37:30):
term because it fits in with someof the board you sort of notions of
cultural capital. You know, boardyou uses that term capital because it has
an economic parallel, right, Andin a way I would argue that that
totally agree with that that you thecultural divides are as important in my view
as economic or material divides. Sowhen I talk about under resourced. I
(37:52):
don't just mean money or you know, I mean culture. You know,
it's just that you haven't been cultivatedin the norms of the classroom or the
workplace. And in the book welist actually the advantages that many children have
and that we put onder sort ofmaterial things like being you know, paid
(38:15):
to have extra private tutoring or livein a house near a school that is
even demand. And then we lookat culture. You know, how you're
helped as you know, by yourmum or dad to know how to navigate
the education system right or t advocatefor yourself. We talk about education adviangs,
and then we talk about health relatedadvantages because sadly, what we're finding
(38:37):
is that many children and those basichealth entitlements are being eroded. So loads
of studies showing that those with shortmaybe some site issues in terms of their
eyes have not been diagnosed properly andthen get sort of labeled as special education
needs right food, clothing, dentalcheckups on. It horrifies me that our
(39:01):
generation, Matthew, no, I'mcleaning you in this by the way,
you and me, you know,we've allowed those basic entitlements to be eroded
in some ways, I would arguethat we have gotten backwards. And if
you look at all the social mobilitystudies that I know as have done.
For example, you know, weknow you're more likely to be downwardly mobile
(39:22):
in terms of social class compared toyour parents. That's the first time on
average, that is, there aresome people who are upwardly mobile, but
for the first time there are morepeople that are downwardly mobile. It's hard
to get a house. If you'reyoung adult, you'll know this is a
teacher. It's really difficult for thisgeneration. And in my view, this
(39:43):
is fundamental stuff. It's about capitalism, It's about is the society we've created,
you know, creating a level playingfield that everyone can even lead a
decent life in. And I'm afraidthe answer for me is no. At
the moment that brings us, bringsme nicely onto the full title of your
book plate because its equity and education, leveling the playing field of learning.
(40:07):
Did you want to say a littlebit more about the book if people are
interested in a perhaps reading it orbuying it. So I've used that metaphor
the playing field of learning a lotin these debates, and as I said,
I don't believe we exist in aworld where there is a level playing
field. The book is a summaryof a lot of the issues we've covered.
(40:30):
So the first two chapters really area summary of sociology and education inequality,
you know, social class and thenthere's some chapters that are specifically for
teachers, you know, giving teachersadvice to how to reflect on this,
and there's stuff from bias in theclassroom all the way to how do you
work with parents and communities in yourschool in again non deficit sort of way.
(40:55):
And then the final chapter really isabout international comparisons and we look at
other countries is to see if anyoneelse is doing this better than us and
what we can learn from them.And there are some things I do think
that other countries do it better thanus, That their inspection systems for schools
aren't as narrow as ours. Theydo take equity really seriously. If you
(41:17):
go to under Scandinavian countries that dovery well for social ability, they prioritize
equity before excellence. You know,we tend to have debates about excellence all
the time. You know, theythink that you go for equity. I
either children that need help most andeveryone else will do. Okay, everyone
else will benefit. So really interestingthose international parsons. But that's the book
(41:40):
in a nutshell perfect. Thank you. And if people want to find out
a little bit more about you,they can add you on Twitter or do
you want to give out any otherdetails at all? Yes, so I'm
still on Twitter. Let's call somethingelse now X. Sorry I should say,
excell I'm on LinkedIn and Twitter.I haven't quite got into Instagram and
other yet, but I probably shoulddo. But I'm You can look me
(42:02):
up on the internet very easily.There's a ted X talk that I did
a few years back that talks aboutthis on level playing field if you want
a forty minute summary of that.But there's lots of me and you know
I'm involved in the media quite alot as a professor, so you know
there's loads of articles in The Guardian, for example, on various things I've
(42:25):
done over the years. So andplease get in touch. You know,
I'm very happy I do do lecturesfor A level students. You know,
I do stuff at Exeter College forexample. I do stuff around the world
actually, and it's always lovely tospeak with A level students as well as
teachers and undergraduates. Brilliant. Thankyou so much for your time Todayly,
(42:46):
I really do appreciate it. Andare we positive about the future? I
always like to end on something abit positive. Do you think we are
going to see changing, We're goingto progress? Are we getting there?
Do you see any sort of developmentas well? Do you know what?
I am optimistic and there's a lotof schemes I'm involved in. We've got
a scheme at the moment using undergraduatesas tutors for year seven pupils in local
(43:10):
schools. Right. I think there'sa real appetite from people to contribute and
to concentrate on this idea of socialjustice. And I look back at history.
You know, one of my favoritepoliticians is President Roosevelt Franklin D.
Roosevelt. You know, America wasstruggling in the Great Depressions about a hundred
years ago, much bigger issues inmany ways than we are facing. And
(43:32):
yet they focused on providing a freehigh education to more people. To the
New Deal where they provided work forthose out of work. You know,
he even proposed a maximum salary.Can imagine that basically no one would be
able. He was hoping to earnover about two hundred and fifty thousand thousand
today's money that didn't get through Congress. I mentioned him because I think that
(43:55):
that focus on social justice created thethe America, the Great America of that
sort of twentieth century. I meanthere's issues now, of course, which
we could go into, but Ithink there's a real you know, I
think if we got together as ateachers and undergraduates and young the young generation,
(44:16):
I think we can really change theworld. I honestly believe that that
sounds like a perfect point to endthe interview. Thank you very much again
for your time today, and goodluck with the promotion and the book as
well. Thank you, Matthew.That was really good. I hope I
didn't speak too much because I getquite excited by these no, no,
thank you very much again. TheSociology Show podcast relies on the kind contributions
(44:40):
of sponsorship and donations. If youenjoy the show, then you can help
with the hosting costs by donating aslittle as five pounds on the go fundme
page. Simply visit UK dot GoFundMedot com and search for the Sociology Show.
If you can donate, then youwill be sent a Sociology Show pen
as a small thank you for yourcontinued support of the show. Thank you
(45:04):
for taking the time to listen tothe podcast. If you would like to
contact the show or be interviewed,then please email the Sociology Show Podcast at
gmail dot com.
Popular Podcasts
CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist
It’s 1996 in rural North Carolina, and an oddball crew makes history when they pull off America’s third largest cash heist. But it’s all downhill from there. Join host Johnny Knoxville as he unspools a wild and woolly tale about a group of regular ‘ol folks who risked it all for a chance at a better life. CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist answers the question: what would you do with 17.3 million dollars? The answer includes diamond rings, mansions, velvet Elvis paintings, plus a run for the border, murder-for-hire-plots, and FBI busts.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.