Soc. 112 Wk 4 "Unequal Childhoods"

How does it matter?

both concerted cultivation and accomplishment of natural growth offer intrinsic benefits (and burdens) for parents and their children -there are signs that some fam. cultural practices, notably those associated w/ concerted cultivation, give children advantages that other cultural practices do not middle class children: - learn to dev. and value an individualized sense of self - are allowed to participate in a variety of coveted activities: gymnastics, soccer, summer camps, etc (these activities improve their skills and teach them to be better athletes than their parents were at comparable ages) - they learn to handle moments of humiliation on the filed as well as moments of glory ; they learn the diff. b/w baroque and classical music - they learn to perform, present themselves [this cultivation has a cost: family schedules are disrupted, dinner hrs are hard to arrange, siblings spend dearly hrs waiting at athletic fields and riding in the car going from one event to another; fam. life despite quiet interludes, is freq. frenetic; parents, esp. mothers must reconcile conflicting priorities, juggling events whose deadlines are much tighter than the deadlines connected to serving meals or getting children ready for bed] *at times everyone in the middle class families including ten-year-old children seemed exhausted* = there are costs and benefits working class & poor children: learn to entertain themselves; they did not complain of being bored; have boundless energy - no exhaustion as in middle class children at the same age; some longed to be in organized activities but finances, lack of transportation, and limited availability of programs get in the way; many are aware of the economic constraints; living spaces are small and often not w/ much privacy; tv is almost always on = fam. members spent more time together in shared space than in middle class fam's ; family ties are very strong, particularly among siblings; dev. close ties w/ their cousins and other extended fam. members in the case of institutional dynamics outside the home, the unequal benefits of middle class children's lives compared to working class and poor children lives become clearer: - middle class fam. members appear reasonable comfortable and entitled - working-class and poor fam. members appear uncomfortable and constrained [both these patterns occur in school interactions as well] - although some working class and poor parents had warm and friendly relations w/ educators, overall they had much more distance from the school than did middle class mothers (pg. 409) - when working class and poor parents did try to intervene in their children's education, they often felt ineffectual [there are also times in which parents encouraged children to outwardly comply w/ school officials but at the same time urged them to resist school authority] *unequal profits - professionals applaud assertiveness and reject passivity as an inappropriate parenting strategy* - middle class children and parents often (but not always) accrued advantages or profits from their efforts diff's in the cultural logic of child rearing are attached to unequal currency in the broader society - the middle class strategy of concerted cultivation appears to have greater promise of being capitalized into social profits than does the strategy of the accomplishment of natural growth found in working class and poor homes (they do not have the same payoff) ex. standardized achievement tests *the potential benefits for middle class children and costs for working class and poor children are nec. speculative since at the end of the study, the children were still in elementary school* still, there are impt. signs of hidden advantages being sown at early ages: - middle class children have extensive experience w/ adults in their lives w/ whom they have a rel. contained, bureaucratically regulated, and somewhat superficial relationship (as children spend 8 wks playing soccer, baseball, etc, they meet and interact w/ adults acting as coaches) = provides work related skills; in settings as varied as health care and gymnastics, middle class children learn at a young age to be assertive and demanding - they expect institutions to be responsive to them and to accommodate their individual needs; by contrast, when a parent tells his/her child to hit another child who is pestering them despite the rules, they are not learning how to make bureaucratic institutions work to their advantages --- instead, they are being given lessons in frustration and powerlessness

focus of article

identifies the largely invisible but powerful ways that parents' social class impact children's life experiences key elements of fam. life cohere to form a cultural logic of child rearing (the diff's among families seem to cluster together in meaningful patterns)

many studies demonstrate the crucial role of educational success in determining occupational success

parents social class positions predicts children's school success and thus their ultimate life chances class position influences critical ascents of fam. life: time use language use, and kin ties

outcome of these diff. philosophies and approaches to child rearing? =

*transmission of differential advantages* to children* more talking in middle-class homes than in working-class and poor homes = greater verbal agility, larger vocabularies, more comfort w/ authority figures, and more familiarity w/ abstract concepts children also developed skill diff's in interacting w/ authority figures in institutions and at home (middle class children - learn young to shake hands of adults and look them in the eye) - in poor families, fam. members usually do not look each other in the eye when conversing --- they live in neighborhoods where it can be dangerous to look people in the eye too long white and black middle class children also exhibited and emergent versions of the *sense of entitlement* characteristic of middle class (they acted s though they had a right to pursue their own individual preferences and to actively manage interactions in institutional settings) --- they appeared comfortable, open to sharing info and asking for attention -- it was common practice among middle class children to shift interactions to suit their preferences middle class children are trained in the "rules of the game" -pg. 403 that govern interaction w/ institutional representatives --- they were not conversant (fam. w/) in other impt. social skills, however such as organizing their time for hrs on end during weekends and summers, spending long periods of time away from adults, or hanging out w/ adults in a nonobtrusive, subordinate fashion. middle class children also learned (by imitation and direct training) how to make the rules work in their favor (the enormous stress on reasoning and negotiation in the home also has a potential advantage for future institutional negotiations -- even those in authority respond positively to such interactions in contrast, working class and poor children showed an emerging *sense of constraint* in their interactions in institutional settings --- they were less likely to try to customize interactions to suit their own preferences --- like their parents the children accepted the actions of persons in authority (although at times they also covertly resisted them) - their parents sometimes were not aware of their children's school situation -ex. when their children were not doing homework --- other times they dismissed the school rules as unreasonable middle class children learn to make demands on pros, and when they succeeded in making the rules work in their favor they augmented their "cultural capital" = skills individuals inherit that can then be translated into diff. forms of value as they move through various institutions) for the future when working class and poor children confronted institutions, they gen. were unable to make the rules work in their favor nor did they obtain capital for adulthood --- b/c of these patterns of legitimization, children raised according to the logic of natural growth tend to develop and emerging sense of constraint

intersection of race and class

Professor West and other middle-class AA's report feeling enrage over this ability to signal their class position in social interactions w/ strangers = in these situations, race trumps social class mothers and fathers of middle class Americans (AA's) of children also keep a keen eye out for signs of racial prob's - parents sought to avoid having their children be the only Black child at an event -pg. 407 (parents also sought to have their children dev. a positive self-image that specifically included their racial identity) - ex. they attended all-black middle class Baptist churches every Sunday [given this evidence, it would be a mistake to suggest that race did not matter in children's lives] - *nevertheless the role of race was less powerful than expected* (white and black parents engaged in very similar, often identical, practices w/ their children as the children age, the rel. importance of race in their daily lives is likely to increase -most AA's do not date or marry outside their own racial and ethnic groups [housing markets are heavily segregated for black homeowners, no matter what their income] -AA's also are likely to encounter racism in their interpersonal contact w/ whites, particularly in employment settings (race made little diff. to younger children than their social class) - pg. 407 // similarly, it was middle class children, Black and White, who squabbled and fought w/ their siblings and talked back to their parents. These behaviors were simply not tolerated in working-class and poor families, Black or white//

what is to be done?

a preoccupation w/ public assistance to the poor has led Americans to overlooked two other impt. forms of social distributions: social insurance programs and taxation policies in size and scope, social insurance programs, particularly Social Security and Medicare, dwarf the cost of payments to poor fam's - moreover these programs have been effective in reducing the percentage of poor among the elderly (it is very likely that the state could take similar steps to reduce inequality among American families) *state intervention would prob. be the most direct and effective way to reduce the kids of social inequality described* (for ex., a child allowance similar to what Sweden and other Western European nations provide, would likely be very effective in eliminating child poverty and reducing the gap in economic and social resources) ---- pg. 412, this exclusion takes place not only b/c they don't have the money to participate but also b/c parental time is so limited - if parental time (say, thanks to fewer hrs at work) were more available, there might be more access to participation -an increase in federal and state recreation monies would be useful since it was clear that as the township became more affluent, more elaborate recreational programs were available - vouchers for extracurricular activities and transportation to activities are another poss. problem: neighborhoods are often rel. homogenous by social class - consolidating neighborhoods so that working class and poor children become part of more affluent neighborhoods would be likely to increase access to desirable facilities - what is far less likely is the existence of the political will to support this redistribution of wealth (instead Americans, as int their won't, are likely to remain preoccupied w/ more ind. solutions) --- since the prob's differ by social class, the solutions do as well

middle-class child rearing "concerted cultivation"

discussions b/w parents and children are a hallmark Ms. Williams and her husband see themselves as "developing" Alexander to cultivate his talents in a concerted (planned) fashion organized activities, established and controlled by mothers and fathers, dominate the lives of the children such as Garret and Alexander - by making certain their children have these and other experiences, middle-class parents engage in a process of *concerted cultivation* = robust sense of entitlement takes root in children = this sense of entitlement plays an impt. role in institutional settings, where middle-class children learn to question adults and address them as relative equals although the children miss out on kin relationships and leisure time, they appear to (at least potentially) gain impt. institutional advantage; they acquire skills that could be valuable in the future when they enter the world of work

blue-collar neighborhoods (working class, poor children) *natural growth*

formidable economics constraints make it a major life task for these parents to put food on the table, arrange for housing, negotiate unsafe neighborhoods, take children to the doctor, clean children's clothes, etc. these adult do no consider the concerted dev. of children, particularly through organized leisure activities, an essential aspect of good parenting crucial repon.'s of parenthood do not lie in eliciting their children's feelings, opinions, and thoughts - they see a clear boundary b/w adults and children partner tend to use directives: *they tell their children what to do rather than persuading them w/ reasoning* working-class and poor children have more control over the character of their leisure activities - most children are free to go out and play w/ friends and relatives who typically live by parents and guardians facilitate the accomplishment of "natural growth" - yet these children and their parents interact w/ central institutions in the society, such as schools, which firmly and decisively promote strategies of concerted cultivation in child rearing = the cultural logic of child rearing at home is out of synch w/ the standard s of institutions = the children gain an emerging sense of distrust, distance, and constraint in their institutional experiences [America may be the land of opp. but it is also a land of inequality] children experience long stretches of leisure time, child-initiated play, clear boundaries b/w adults and children, and daily interactions w/ kin (they have more childlike lives w/ autonomy from adults and control over their extended leisure time)

limits of social class

moments of connection - pg. 405 - seemed deeply meaningful to both children and parents in all social classes, even as they take diff. shape by social class, in terms of language, activity, and character all the fam's we observed also had rituals: fav. meals they often ate, tv programs they watched, toys or games that were very impt, fam. outings they looked forward to, and other common experiences the content of their rituals varied (esp. by social class) - what did not vary was that the children enjoyed these experiences and they provided a sense of membership in a fam. in all social classes, a substantial part of the children's days was spent in repetitive rituals: getting up, making the bed, taking a shower, getting dressed, brushing hair and teeth, eating breakfast, etc. (these moments were interspersed with hrs, days, and weeks of household work, tedious demands, mundane tasks, and tension) = TRUE for all families, regardless of social class -- nor were any fam's immune to life tragedies: across all social classes there were premature deaths due to car accidents or suicides -pg. 405 the degree of organization and orderliness in daily life also did not vary systematically by social class - some houses were clean and some were a disaster (though they all felt like home)

cultural repertoires (collection)

professionals who work w/ children, such as teachers, doctors, and counselors, generally agree about how children should be raised (they may disagree from time to time) - yet there is little dispute among pros on the broad principles for promoting educational dev. in children through proper parenting --------- these standards include: impt. of talking w/ children, dev. their educational interests, and playing an active role in their schooling (parenting guidelines typically stress the impt. of reasoning w/ children and teaching them to solve problems through negotiation rather than w/ physical force) -- b/c these guidelines are so generally accepted, and b/c they focus on a set of practices concerning how parents should raise children, they form a *dominant set of cultural repertoires* about how children should be raised --- this widespread agreement among pros about the broad principles for child rearing permeates our society. (a small number of experts thus potentially shape the behavior of a large # of parents) pros advice regarding the best way to raise children has changed regularly over the last two centuries (ex. physical punishment) *middle class parents appear to shift their beh's in a variety of spheres more rapidly and more thoroughly than do working class or poor parents* (middle class parents respond most promptly to pros that shift their recommendations towards child rearing) in recent decades = middle-class children in the US have had to face the prospect of "declining fortunes" - worried about how their children will get ahead, middle class parents are increasingly determined to make sure that their children are not excluded from any opp. that might eventually contribute to their advancement (they try to stimulate their children's dev. and foster their cognitive and social skills) the commitment among working class and poor families to provide comfort, food, shelter, and other basic support req's ongoing effort, given economic challenges and the formidable (intimidating) demands of child rearing (sustaining children's natural growth is viewed as an accomplishment

concerted cultivation and the accomplishment of natural growth

social class made a sig. diff in the routines of children's daily lives concerted cultivation: parents actively fostered and assessed their children talents, opinions, and skills; they scheduled their children's activities; reasoned w/ them; the hovered over them and outside and the home they did not hesitate to intervene on the children's behalf ; the made a deliberate and sustained effort to stimulate children's dev. and to cultivate their cognitive and social skills working class and poor parents: viewed children's dev. as unfolding spontaneously, as long as they were provided w/ comfort, food, shelter, and other basic support (cultural logic = *accomplishment of natural growth*); like with concerted cultivation, this commitment too required ongoing effort; sustaining children's natural growth despite formidable (intimidating) life challenges is prob. viewed as an accomplishment; parents gen. organize their children's lives so they spent time in and around home, in informal play w/ peers, siblings, and cousins = the children had more autonomy regarding leisure time and more opp.'s for child-initiated play; parents were also more resp. for their lives outside the home; adult-organized activities were uncommon; instead of relentless focus on reasoning and negotiation that took place in middle class fams, there was less speech (including whining) in working class and poor homes; boundaries b/w adult and children were clearly marked; parents gen. used language not as an aim in itself but more as a conduit for social life; directives were common; in their institutional encounters - the parents turned over resp. to pros; when parents did try to intervene they felt that they were less capable and less efficacious that they would have liked [while both social classes differed in impt. ways, particularly in the stability of their lives, there was not a maj diff. b/w them in their cultural logic of child rearing] - instead in this study the cultural divide appeared to be b/w the middle class and everyone else across all social classes, child-rearing practices often appeared to be natural; like breathing child rearing usually seemed automatic and unconscious; parents were scarcely aware that they were orienting their children in specific ways = unconscious choices & conscious ones - pg. 406 [focus on natural growth - "taken for granted character"] - bottom of pg. 406

why? the search for explanations

some commentators today decry the "overscheduled" lives of children; they long for days when most children had unstructured lives, filled w/ informal play - although there have always been impt. social class diff's in childhood, for much of US history, children played an impt. economic role in fam. life (ex. colonial America - "nimble fingers" were useful in factory work -pg. 410) + they were also economic assets on fam. farms - children did have some time for unstructured leisure, but it was limited Viviana Zelizer shows that through the end of the 19th century and into the early decades of the 20th century, these practices were accompanied by beliefs supp. the impt. of children working hard = if anything, the concern was that w/o specific training in "useful work", children might grow up to be "paupers and thieves" [it appears that it was only for a rel. brief historical period that children were granted long stretches of leisure time w/ unstructured play] - in the period after WWll, white and Black children were permitted to play for hrs on end w/ other neighborhood children, after school, during evenings, and on weekends *the "institutionalization of children's leisure" and the rise of concerted cultivation more gen. are recent dev's" --- pg. 411 - rather, the middle class parents in this study and, poss. throughout the country, appear to have been raised according to the logic of the accomplishment of natural growth in attempting to understand this historical shift (the institutionalization of children's leisure and the emphasis on "intensive mothering"), commentators often point to the impact of modern life, esp. the impact of increasing "rationalization" = this view termed the *McDonaldization of society* by George Ritzer finds an increasing standardization of daily life, w/ an emphasis on efficiency, predictability, control, and calculability (he notes that the principles from the world of fast food have been adapted to other parts of social life) - family too is becoming increasingly *rationalized*(logic of impersonal, competitive, contractual, commodified, efficient, profit-maximizing, self-interested relations) busy affluent parents can hire chauffeurs to take children to their organized activities, hire educators, and hire pro personal shoppers to help buy and wrap holiday gifts- the services available for b-day parties (e.g. a special room at McDonald's, an overnight at a science museum, or a pro party coordinator are sings of increasing rationalization of fam. life) - the rationalization of children's leisure is evident in the proliferation of organized activities w/ a predictable schedule, delivering a particular quantity of experiences within a specific time period, under the control of adults (that children's time use had shifted from unstructured play to organized activities does not mean that fam's no longer have fun during their leisure hrs) [point is that areas of fam. life are growing more systematic, predictable, and regulated than they have been in the recent past] ------ forces that have converged to bring about this change include increasing concerns about the safety of children who play unsupervised on local streets, rises in employment (resulting in adults being at home less), and a decline in the availability of neighborhood playmates due to a dropping birth rate and the effects of suburbanization, esp. the increased size of homes and decreased density of housing (greater emphasis on the use of reasoning in the home, particularly as a form of discipline, as well as interventions in institutions, can also be seen as a form of rationalization, particularly the well-documented trend of "scientific motherhood") - still the analysis of the rise of concerted cultivation must also be grappled w/ the changing position of the US in the world economy, and the accompanying decline in highly paid manufacturing jobs and increase in the less desirable service-sector jobs = this restructuring makes it very likely that when today's children are adults, their standard of living will be lower than that of their parents = fewer good jobs and more bad jobs = competition will be intense

slowing it down: policy implication for middle-class families

the frenetic schedule of some middle class families is a topic that increasingly bubbles up in media reports= there is an emerging social movement of pros. and middle class parents to resist the scheduling of children's lives resistance is spreading: - at the collective level, grassroots organizations such as "Family Life First" are pressuring coaches and adult leaders of other organized activities to make fam. time a priority //these incipient movements have in common an explicit recognition that children's schedules are absurd, that fam. life is in thrall to a frenzy of "hyper-scheduling"// - at the ind. level parents are encouraged to set strict limits on children's activities. Some parents proudly announce of websites that they require their children to limit themselves to only one activity at a time - a systematic critique of parents' role in supervising and intervening in institutions has not yet emerged - indeed many pros. actively recruit and encourage parental involvement in schooling; doubts about the value of extensive reasoning w/ children on the other hand are mounting - describing these children as out of control and craving adult interventions, the authors call for parents to "set limits and make decisions" *for overburdened and exhausted parents, the policy recc's center on setting limits: reducing the # of children's activities, scheduling fam. time, making fam. events a higher priority than children's events, and generally putting the needs of the group ahead of the needs of the individual*

gaining compliance w/ dominant standards: implications for working class and poor fam's

the policy recommends center on trying to gain advantages for children in institutional settings - some programs stress the impt. of reading to children, bolstering vocab, and addressing "summer setback" (a ref. to working class and poor children tendency to lose academic ground when they are out of school while middle class children's academic growth spurts ahead) providing children w/ the resources needed to comply w/ institutional standards may be helpful, but it leaves unexamined the problematic nature of class based childrearing methods it is poss. that policies could be dev. to teach children to "code switch" as they move b/w home and encounters w/ institutions - one promising dev. is the success of programs that offer to working class and poor children the kinds of concerted cultivation middle class children get at home (ex. "I Had a Dream" philanthropic ventures through which schools and private tutors take on the roles often carried out by middle class parents (and the tutors they hire) - these programs have improved children's school performance; reduces suspensions, beh. problems, and teen pregnancies, and increased college admittance rates - more traditional programs such as "Big Brother/ Big Sister", have improved school experiences [in sum, policy recc's for working class and poor children do not address hectic schedules or the need for greater parental control, as those for middle class children do. Rather they focus on gaining institutional advantages for children by encouraging parents to use reasoning to bolster their children's vocab and to play a more active role in their children's schooling]

income & wealth (+ education)

the richest 10% of fam's in our society own almost 80% of all real estate (other than fam. homes) - *pg. 404* one widely used indicator of inequality in income is the child poverty rate - a rate that is heavily dependent on social policy (there are many more poor children in the US than in most Western European countries) educational accomplishments are also lopsided ---- - in the US, just under one quarter of all adults have completed a bachelors degree, this is higher for individuals in their 20s - more than 10% of high school students drop out -even among younger people, for whom college education is becoming increasingly common, a clear maj. (from 2/3 to 3/4) do not graduate some studies show that after taking into account social position, Black youth are more likely to pursue higher education than whites, overall levels of educational attainment are far lower for Black children substantial stratification also exists within higher education, raining from community colleges to elite universities (the more elite the school, the more richly graduates are rewarded) moreover, there has been a profound shift in the US and world economies, w/ a decline in "good jobs" w/ high wages/ pensions/ health benefits/ and stability, and a rise in "bad jobs" w/ rel. low wages, no benefits, little opp. for career promotion, and a lack of stability [in the lives of most people, these separate threads - their educational attainment, what kind of job they get, and how much money they earn -- are all tightly interwoven -- together these factors constitute parents' social position or social structural location many studies have demonstrated that parents' social structural location has profound implications for their children's life chances - pg. 404