Some working-class parents fail to transmit the appropriate norms, values, attitudes, knowledge, skills etc that is the right culture needed for success.

Three main factors responsible for working-class under-achievment; Language, Parents' Education and working-class subculture.

Working-class parents are less likely to give their children educational toys and activities that will stimulate their thinking and reasoning skills. This affects their intellectual development so that when they start school theyre at a disadvantage.

The working class use restricted code. Less analytic and more descriptive has a limited vocabulary and is formed of simple sentences or even just gestures.

Middle class use the elaborated code. This is more analytic, with a wide vocabulary and complex sentences. It is universalistic - speakers spell out their meanings explicitly and dont just assume.

Parenting style: Educated parents emphasise consistent discipline, high expectations, active learning and exploration. Less educated parents' inconsistent discipline means children have poorer motivation and problems with interacting with teachers.

Parents' educational behaviours: Educated parents are more aware of what helps children progress, e.g. they form good relationships with teachers and see the value of educational visits.

Language: This is an essential part of education. The way parents comunicate affects a child's cognitive development.

Use of income: Educated parents spend their income to promote children's development, e.g. on educational toys.

Immediate gratification: wanting rewards now rather than being willing to make sacrifices and working hard for future rewards - unlike the deferred gratification practised by the midlle class.

Fatalism: A belief of 'whatever will be, will be'. Working-class children don't believe they can improve their position through their own individual efforts.

Low value on education: Hyman argues the working class dont value education, so they don't try. Douglas argues that the parents show less interest and offer less support.

It ignores the importance of material factors such as poverty.

It ignores internal factors such as labelling by teachers.

It blames the victim for their failure. Critics argue that its not actually the working who are culturally deprived but the fact that they have a different culture to that of the school and this puts them at a disadvantage.

Poor housing: Overcrowding or cold damp roooms may mean children have nowhere suitable to do homework or study putting them at a disadvantage.

Poor diet can lead to illness, abscences from school and a lack of concentration in class due to hunger.

Poorer families can afford fewer educational oppurtunities e.g. school trips, computers or private tuition.

Higher education (university) costs a lot of money that many poor people cannot afford. similarly Callender and Jackson found working-class students more debt averse meaning they saw costs than benefits of going to university.

Bourdieu (1984) argued m/c pupils are more successfull due to parents owning more assets, these come in two forms.
Economic capital and Cultural capital.

Not all poor children fail - those with supportive parents may gain motivation from their situation.

It ignores factors in school such as labelling from teachers and streaming.

Teachers label the w/c pupils lazy and underachievers so they believe it and the act that way causing them to underachieve. This can happen directly opposite with the m/c as they are labelled high achievers and workers. Beckers study of 1961.

A self fulfilling prophecy is a predicytion made about something and it comes true simply because it is made. Teachers apply this negatively to the w/c and positively to the m/c subconsciously.

Similar ability classes and for all subjects, often described as an extreme and institutionalised form of labelling.

Douglas found the IQ of students in lower streams fell over time wheras the IQ of students in higher streams increased. Lower streams may be denied access to parts of the curricullum.

Pro-school are generally formed by people in higher streams. They accept the school's values and goals of hard work, regular attendance, respect for teachers etc.

Anti schoool are often formed by those in lower streams. They reject school values. they dislike school, flout its rules and disrespect teachers.

To deterministic not all pupils who are labelled as failures will fulfill the prophecy - some reject the label and succeed, nor do all w/c students get labelled negatively.

Focusing on internal factors may mean we neglect the role of the home and other background factors such as poverty and cultural deprivation.

Archer (2010) uses Bouerdieu's concept of habitus to understand the relationship between pupil's working clas identities and underachievment.

Habitus: is a social classes habitual ways of thinking, being and acting, e.g. lifestyles and expectations about what is normal for 'people like us'.

Symbolic capital and symbolic violence: school commits symbolic violence by devaluing w/c pupils' habitu. Judging their clothing, accents and interests.

Symbolic violence leads to the denial of symbolic capital (recognition and status).

Nike identities: symbolic violence leads pupils to create alternative methods of gaining symbolic capital vi consuming branded goods.

Ingram (2009) found fitting in was a large problem for w/c grammar school boys as they struggled to deal with the difference between their habitus and that of their m/c school.

Evans (2009) discovered many succesfull w/c girls felt their identity would not be accepted by the elite universities so stayed at home to study.