Poorer Kids May Be Too Respectful at School

Working-class kids ask for help from teachers less often and less aggressively than do their middle-class counterparts

 

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Kids from different economic backgroundsbehave differently in classrooms. For example, working class kids are less likely to ask for help from teachers than are their middle class counterparts. And when they do ask for help, they’re less aggressive about it. That’s according to a study that followed students from the third grade through the fifth, published in the journal American Sociological Review. [Jessica McCrory Calarco, Coached for the Classroom: Parents’ Cultural Transmission and Children’s Reproduction of Educational Inequalities]

Part of the difference in how kids act comes from the guidance they’ve gotten at home. As a rule, working class parents coach their kids to work out problems on their own. And if the kids did ask for help, it was in subtle ways—like sitting quietly with a hand raised. Middle class kids? Their parents urged them to be proactive, even to interrupt their teachers for help.
 
The result is that teachers were more likely to attend to the assistance-seekers and louder class-participators. Which left working class kids behind and magnified inequalities. So the working class child’s behavior, which they and their parents see as “respectful,” could impair their success in the classroom. And prevent them from joining their classmates in higher social classes.
 
—Erika Beras
 
[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]
 

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe