"I ain’t goin’ to college. Who wants to go to college? I’d just end up gettin’ a shitty job anyway." So says Freddie Pinella1, described as "an intelligent 11 year old boy from Clarendon Heights, a low-income housing development in a northeastern city." So, in fact, say most of the teenage, white males who live in the project where MacLeod undertook a study to see why these underclass youths had such leveled aspirations. The decision of the youths to drop out of school was noted by MacLeod as a "logical choice." For them, the cards have already been shuffled and dealt, and there Ain’t No Makin’ It, so why bother?
Jay MacLeod, 1987, Ain’t No Makin’ It, p.1
"When you were little, what did you think you’d like to be when you grew up? A hard question for most people from poor homes--one that focuses sharply on the limitations that poverty exacts upon the future of its victims...
‘We were maybe one step above what you would call white trash. If we thought about it at all, we would have considered ourselves lucky to get through high school. Most of the kids in the family didn’t do that. There was no demand on any of us for any goal. You see, my father wasn’t an educated man. He was taken out of school when he was nine, and him not having an education, it kept him from seeing a lot of hopes for his kids. He can hardly write his own name, even now. Oh, I guess he didn’t want us to be just ordinary laborers like he was, but it wasn’t ever talked about. Like, going to college was never discussed. It never occurred to me to think about it. That was something other kids--rich kids--did. All I knew was that I’d have to work, and I didn’t think much about what kind of work I’d be doing. There didn’t seem much point in thinking about it, I guess.’
In fact, there not only ‘wasn’t much point in thinking about it,’ there was no way to think about it. For in order to plan for the future, people must believe it possible to control their fate--a belief that can only be held if nourished in experience. That seldom happens in working-class life."
Lillian Rubin, 1976, Worlds of Pain, pp. 37-38
As far back as I can remember, I believed my father was a genius even though he dropped out of school in the seventh grade. Dad was exceptionally adept in everything from electronics to automobile repairs. Even so, he couldn’t find a job lucrative enough to support our family of six comfortably even though he always worked hard and rarely missed a day. As a child, I remember often thinking, 'If Dad just had the paper to prove he’s smart, he could get a job paying really good money, and then we wouldn’t be so poor.' Dad never got the paper, and when he retired in October 1984, he was making just over $13,000 annually--not a lot for a genius....or anybody else for that matter. Although a high school diploma for us kids was essential to my parents (mom was a high school graduate but never aspired to have a career), college was never discussed. College was something that other, rich people, could afford-not us. This was just understood, so there was no reason to discuss something so out of reach. I never considered going to college. I, like all my siblings, dropped out of high school. I got married....then divorced. A dropout and single-parent, I entered the work force and, of necessity, accepted work in dead-end jobs and swallowed the humiliation of being passed over for promotions time and time again--indeed, I felt lucky to have a job. But, the more exposure I gained to the world of work, the more I became convinced that I had far more potential than the jobs I obtained would allow me to explore. Dad had taught me to work hard and take pride in whatever I did; this was supposed to help me in gaining recognition and advancement at work (promotions, raises, etc.): it didn’t pay off (for him or me). Instead, I learned from bitter experience that working hard gets you nowhere without the credentials to increase opportunities. Finally at age 23, fed up with my situation of severe poverty even though I worked full time, exasperated with dead-end jobs in which I couldn’t progress, distraught over having to raise my daughter in a slum, and enraged with the oppression I found so inescapable, I went back to school seeking ‘the paper.' I have attained a GED, two Associate degrees, and I’m on the threshold of earning a Bachelor Degree; I intend to pursue my Master’s and Doctorate. Could I financially afford to undertake this journey? NO! But, perhaps a better question might be, could I afford NOT to? Given the economic situation in this country, considering the emphasis on higher education, and given the fact that I am a woman of lower class origin (distinct disadvantages even with a higher degree), if I truly intend to succeed, I must continue, for only upon accomplishing the highest degree of academic success possible can I feel more confident that education will not be a plausible reason for any employer to block my advancement....only then can I feel more secure in the degree of credibility and increased bargaining power I bring to the job market....only then do I have a chance to succeed....only then might I don the cloak of achievement and perhaps break the chains that bind me in lower socioeconomic stagnation.
Cathy Hyslop Hammack
Introduction
Education is an American society panacea for poverty and is thought to be the best means by which those of lower socioeconomic/social class may rise above their status. Conventional wisdom holds that American society and employers place a great emphasis on higher education, and research confirms that most lucrative and prestigious jobs today require education beyond the high school level (Berryman and Bailey, 1992; Bowles and Gintis, 1994; Haveman, 1994; Jencks et al., 1972; Karabel, 1977; Inger and Larsen, 1990; Manski, 1994; Milner, 1972; Schrag, 1994). Education seems a reasonable solution to the problem of poverty and a feasible means by which to succeed, and this great "equalizer" appears to work--in theory. However, there is a great deal of speculation as to whether higher education is a feasible route to success for all concerned. The odds are against those of lower socioeconomic status (SES) in the division of labor, with or without a college education (Bowles and Gintis, 1976; Jencks et al., 1972). Further, the cards are so stacked in the higher classes’ favor in elementary and secondary education that there is room for debate over whether the lower2 classes are actually free to choose to pursue higher education. This debate centers around educational inequalities (discrimination in various forms in elementary and secondary education against those of "lower" origins), socioeconomic factors (inability to pay for a college education) and the contention that education plays an enormous role in the reproduction of social classes (Anyon, 1989; Bourdieu, 1977; Bourdieu and Passeron, 1990; Bowles, 1977; Bowles and Gintis, 1976; Colclough and Beck, 1986; Lubeck, 1989; MacLeod, 1987).
Social reproduction theory contends that those of higher SES tend to maintain their positions of prestige and abilities to secure lucrative positions and ensure that their children inherit their advantages (regardless of ability), while those of lower origins tend to maintain and perpetuate their positional disadvantages (again, regardless of ability). Although there is substantial evidence that social reproduction is prevalent in American society (MacLeod, 1987; Bowles and Gintis, 1976; Bowles, 1977; Colclough and Beck, 1986; Gottschalk, et al., 1994; Lubeck, 1989; Persell, 1977), social mobility is possible (Colclough and Beck, 1986).
Education beyond the secondary level is perhaps the only route by which the disadvantaged have an opportunity to attain lucrative, prestigious jobs and realize more stable upward mobility (Schrag, 1994). Even so, higher education is a route rarely chosen by lower class members regardless of gender: Sewell and Shah (1977) found that males of low SES who possessed a high level of intelligence were 38.3 percent less likely to attend college than their male counterparts of high SES (52.4 percent versus 90.7 percent, respectively), and females of high intelligence but low SES were 48.9 percent less likely to attend college than their higher SES counterparts (27.5 percent and 76.4 percent respectively).3 (p. 205) Sewell and Hauser (1992) suggest that the statistics on education have changed least among the dependent variables researched in the 1977 Sewell and Shah study, although the student body configuration may have somewhat changed in recent years due to a larger percentage of women and other minorities now pursuing higher education. (p. 602) Other research asserts that the number of lower class members who attend college--whether one is looking at gender, intelligence factors, environmental factors, economic background, education of parents, or any other factor--is significantly less than their higher class counterparts in every case (Bowles and Gintis, 1976; Bowles, 1977; Colclough and Beck 1986; Jencks, et al., 1972).4
Some lower SES members do attempt to defy the odds. Yet, of those who attend college, few go beyond the two- or four-year level to obtain graduate degrees. In 1965 (the last year of the study which covered 1869 to 1965), Collins (1989) reported that 19.71 percent of the total population of Americans aged 15-24 received BA’s or equivalents and 5.02 percent aged 25-34 received MAs, while the total number of students who achieved PhDs was 0.73 percent. (p. 51). In 1972, Jencks noted that "almost 20 percent" of all students graduate from college, while not quite 10 percent go on to "do some kind of graduate work." (p. 19)
Although the reasons necessitating the achievement of degrees in order to fulfill job requirements are questionable (Jencks et al., 1972; Bowles and Gintis, 1976)5, the requirement of degrees for procuring lucrative employment steadily increases while the demand for uneducated, unskilled workers continuously decreases (Berryman and Bailey, 1992; Collins, 1989). Berryman and Bailey (1992) note that the workplace constantly changes due to advanced technology. With these changes, employers require increasingly higher levels of skills from their employees--skills purportedly learned in college. (Pp. 1-2) In light of this, why do so many lower class members seem to fail to make the connection between higher education and employment? In the past, jobs in America were chiefly agricultural, manufacturing, assembly-line, and/or manual labor jobs requiring little or no education; technology had yet to excel to the point of replacing most manual labor. Thus, lack of education was not a problem when seeking employment, and those who sought advanced degrees were customarily those of the intellectual, higher classes who sought education strictly for the sake of acquiring more knowledge, not procuring employment (Bowles and Gintis, 1976). Thus, those in the working class have had a disadvantage from the beginning in connecting education to economic advancement. America has evolved into a highly technological society and the emphasis on education has grown, but many of those with working class backgrounds have either failed to comprehend or keep up with the rapid changes in job requirements brought about with this technological evolution; too many still appear not to make the connection between education and employment.
This failure to connect education with its economic benefits becomes more apparent when one considers Jencks’ (1972) findings that, in years of "regular schooling" (elementary and secondary education), "Blacks get 10 percent less schooling than whites...[and] blue collar children spend 13 percent less time in school than white-collar children." (p. 22) Jencks’ findings also acquaint us with the knowledge that, not only are the number of lower class members who seek higher education markedly less than their higher-class counterparts, many poor drop out of high school before even achieving a diploma. Wagenaar (1987) reports that approximately 30 percent of students of low SES drop out of high school before achieving a diploma, and other studies note that from one quarter to one third of high school students with lower class origins drop out. Wagenaar (1987) notes various reasons why many of lower SES drop out and offers numerous considerations to the dropout phenomenon in his extensive literature review. Interestingly, Jencks et al. (1972) note that there is merit to the choice that many working class youths make to drop out of school: "If people do not want to attend school or college, an egalitarian society ought to accept this as a legitimate decision and give these people subsidized job training...When a student feels he is not benefiting from school, we suspect he is usually right." (p. 23) Based on the results of his extensive field research, MacLeod (1987) concurs with Jencks’. For many reasons, MacLeod argues that dropping out of high school is, in his opinion, a logical choice for the underclass youths in his study. MacLeod also notes that most of these underclass youths have leveled aspirations and are uninterested in the mere thought of college even if they believed higher education to be within their grasp--and the reasons for their disinterest are very telling indeed.
One problem that affects the decision of lower SES members to pursue college is the many barriers they face in their early educational pursuits. Further, although achieving degrees often increases the chance of upward mobility, degrees do not guarantee upward mobility nor occupational equality to those of lower SES origins (Persell, 1979, p. 3; Bowles and Gintis, 1976, Pp. 35-36; Jencks et al., 1972). For instance, Jencks et al. (1972) find that "the biggest single source of income differences [between higher and lower status males] seems to be the fact that men from high status families have higher incomes than men from low status families, even when they enter the same occupation, have the same amount of education, and have the same test scores." (p. 216; italics and bold added) Persell (1979) and Bowles and Gintis (1976) support these findings.6
Much is known about the educational barriers to social mobility that lower SES members experience, but a complete exploration of mobility should also consider factors of success. There are factors which must be considered when trying to understand why an individual does or does not aspire to pursue higher education (thus increasing one’s potential of procuring more lucrative and/or prestigious employment), and certain factors may actually assist in the achievement of that goal. Though not a focus of their studies, there are common factors among high school achievers which may be gleaned from the work of Jencks, et al., 1972; Katz, 1977; Rubin, 1976; Bowles and Gintis, 1976; Bowles, 1977; and Wagenaar, 1987. In addition, Thompson (1993) notes primary factors contributing to the attainment of various degrees and ultimate employment in her study of 103 upwardly mobile women. Finally, Higginbotham and Weber (1995) study professional, managerial, and administrative black and white women with middle and working class roots in order to compare their backgrounds and explore various factors of upward mobility and education.
MacLeod (1987) suggests that the goal of social reproduction theory is to identify barriers to social mobility and illumine specific mechanisms and processes contributing to the intergenerational transmission of inequality. (p. 6) This research, in effect, explores social reproduction in reverse. That is, my goal is to examine one mechanism purported to facilitate upward mobility, the achievement of college degrees, and explore the processes/factors which encourage/affect the pursuit of higher education. The rationale of this approach is that valuable insight previously not considered in such a manner may be gained thus informing social reproduction theory and existing literature.
In the review of literature, problems that lower SES members face when pursuing education will be explored as well as factors of success. This may lead to a better understanding of those who undertake the upward mobility journey via education. Specifically, the focus of this research is to explore the following questions: First, what part does social reproduction play in education and vice-versa? What is the importance of education to social mobility (by increasing chances of more lucrative employment opportunities)? What barriers do members of the working class face in education? Of the lower SES members who undertake the journey of upward mobility via higher education, what do we know about them? Of those who pursue/achieve degrees, what common threads can we find to link their motivations and/or successes? Hopefully by identifying common threads of success, factors may be identified that will assist lower SES Americans to break the cycle of transmitting intergenerational inequalities and help them instead to weave a cloak of achievement.
Next Section (Literature Review)