I Just Wanna Be Average By Jean Anyon Analysis

According to Jean Anyon, schools in different social classes get different educations and get treated differently at school. How the children are taught will affect how they do in the future. The children who are in school now will be our leaders in the future, so we need to invest in our students. The Working Class students are taught that the process and following the rules is most important, not the answer. If we have government representatives, military leaders, and possibly presidents focusing on following the rules we will not be able to better our country. Children should be taught that they are valued and that their opinions matter, so that later in life they can continue to have confidence in their own ideas. Gaining this confidence starts in school. Anyon studied how the students are treated and taught at schools who are teaching to only one kind of social class. I believe that, most schools are a mix of at least two different social classes. In general, Affluent Professional and Executive Elite schools have students learn from thinking for themselves. On the other hand, Working Class and Middle Class students learn by the teacher thinking for the them. Most schools are a mix of these different teaching styles.

What does social class mean? Social class means a division of a society based on social and economic status. Now, what does hidden curriculum mean? Hidden Curriculum means a side effect of education, such as norms, values and beliefs in the classroom. Accordingly, Jean Anyon’s, author of “Social Class and the Hidden Curriculum of Work” claims that each and every social class has it’s own very different way of teaching in schools. Anyon states a plethora of strengths and weaknesses in this article. She believes that all children have been taught to learn, comprehend, and behavior in plenty of different ways due to the social class’s they have been thrown into. Anyon examined each social class which have been named The Working Class, The Middle Class, The Affluent Professional Class, and lastly The Executive Elite Class. An educational perspective came well from her work view point and based off it - I have thrown in my own opinion by agreeing with her during this essay.

In “Social Class and the Hidden Curriculum of Work” Jean Anyon theorizes about the role education plays in society. Anyon’s central thesis is that public schools in complex societies like our own make available different types of education experience and curriculum knowledge to students in different social classes. Jean Anyon performs a study on different elementary schools’ where the children come from different backgrounds, the parents had different incomes, occupations, and other relevant social characteristics. The method’s Anyon used to prove her point was gathering data in classroom observations, interviewing students, teachers, principals, and district administrative staff; and assessment of curriculum and other materials in each classroom and school. After careful analysis of Anyon’s model and my personal experiences in Windham High School I can confirm that I attend a school Anyon would identify as the working class. Anyon’s model about the working class is valid. For example on the demographics, Windham High School classifys’ as working class society and most families make less than $12,000 and face financial struggles. Anyon characterizes the working class as 85% white however the majority of the working class in my community are composed of Puerto Rican, Asian or African American groups.

The article “Social Class and the Hidden Curriculum of Work” by Jean Anyon is about research conducted in five different schools of four different social classes; the Working Class, the Middle Class, the Professional Class, and the Executive Class. In the data collected, Anyon discovered the various ways that these five schools teach the children. First, the two Working Class Schools taught the children really poorly, often telling the children to follow steps to get the right answer, and always yelling at them when they’re out of line. The Middle Class School teaches the kids a little better, by making the children actually work to get the right answer. The Professional School sought to get the children to be more creative with their work. And finally, the Executive Class school will tell the children that they are fully responsible for their work, and they will not keep up with children if they miss assignments.

A lot people work very hard and struggle through life trying to be the very best at every single thing they do; this is a good trait to have but, sadly not everyone has this type of work ethic or motivation. Some people just try to get by and go through the motions, often not getting the education they they are rightfully entitled to. This is the type of mentality that Mike Rose discusses in his narrative “I Just Wanna Be Average.” Throughout the narrative, Rose shares personal experiences of mistakenly being set on the wrong track of his educational career due to a mix up with test results. Rose gets placed into the vocational education track, which is where the person he was mixed up with, with the exact same last name was supposed

The purpose of this study is to provide empirical evidence of the existence of what the author calls a “hidden curriculum” in schools by observing the types and differences in school work across a spectrum of social classes (Anyon, 1980, p. 67). The rationale for this study is lies in a body of research suggesting that the type of curriculum offered to students is dependent upon their social class (Anyon, 1980). The curriculum variants observed include: behavior expectations and types of knowledge and skills offered. Consequently, the curriculum differences work to prevent movement across social class and prepare students only for the types of employment typical of their social class (Anyon, 1980). Anyon attempts to draw attention to this topic in the United States, as it had been largely ignored at the time (1980).

Lubrano explains how middle-class children understand the importance of receiving higher education, while working-class children fail to see the purpose of preparing for a higher level in the short term. According to Lubrano, “Middle-class kids are groomed for another life” (534). Author Patrick Finn states, “Working-class kids see no such connection, understand no future life for which digesting Shakespeare might be of value” (534). In answering this question, Lubrano must look at the various circumstances that account for the poor performances among working-class individuals, the supportive relationships middle-class students have with their parents and teachers, and how children of working-class parents struggle when preparing for later life. In the address, Alfred Lubrano must address the difference in treatment between working-class and middle-class children attending

Lareau, in Unequal Childhoods, focuses on socioeconomic status and how that affects outcomes in the education system and the workplace. While examining middle-class, working-class and poor families, Lareau witnessed differing logics of parenting, which could greatly determine a child’s future success. Working-class and poor families allow their children an accomplishment of natural growth, whereas middle-class parents prepare their children through concerted cultivation. The latter provides children with a sense of entitlement, as parents encourage them to negotiate and challenge those in authority. Parents almost overwhelm their children with organized activities, as we witnessed in the life of Garrett Tallinger. Due to his parents and their economic and cultural capital, Garrett was not only able to learn in an educational setting, but through differing activities, equipping him with several skills to be successful in the world. Lareau suggests these extra skills allow children to “think of themselves as special and as entitled to receive certain kinds of services from adults” (39). Adults in the school system are in favor of these skills through concerted cultivation, and Bourdieu seems to suggest that schools can often misrecognize these skills as natural talent/abilities when it’s merely cultivated through capital. This then leads to inequalities in the education system and academic attainments.

Rose first explains how the educational system classifies a child’s class. He then proceeds to elaborate on how the vocational class works for those who do not do as well in school. He uses pathos so the reader feels emotional for the less fortunate student in the vocational class. Rose conveys his beliefs by using personal examples. He learns true qualities of people and shares the stories of Dave Snyder, Ted Richard, and Ken Harvey. Sharing the personal indications of what puts the students in the vocational class, gives the reader the notion that they have strengths that do not apply doing well in school. Rose ties the examples together in the end to confirm his opinion that one should never settle being defined as average.

According to Bynner and Joshi (1999) class differences have persisted since the late 1950’s. It can be seen that all studies carried out by various theorist came to the same conclusion that middle class pupils tend to do a lot better than working class in terms of educational achievement. Pupils from middle class backgrounds tend to pass more exams, stay on at school for longer and are five times more likely to go to university. This gap in achievement widens with age as right from nursery school to university, processes like labelling or the self fulfilling prophecy take

Jonathan Kozol, in the chapter entitled “Other People’s Children, discusses and justifies the kinds of limitations placed on children who must attend poorly funded, educationally inferior school. Kozol argues that children in the inner-city schools are not fit to go to college and that they should be trained in schools for the jobs they will eventually hold, even though these jobs are less prestigious, lowest-level jobs in society. Kozol’s argument is based on the fact that students from the inner-city or rather from the societies that do not have enough job opportunities are not supposed to learn much because their society cannot accommodate most of the courses that are often found in the urban settings. For example, there is a point where Kozol cites one of the businessman’s statement which says, ‘It doesn’t make sense to offer something that most of these urban kids will never use.’ The businessman continues to argue, ‘no one expects these ghetto kids to go to college. Most of them are lucky if they are literate. If we can teach some useful skills, get them to stay in school and graduate, and maybe into jobs, we’re giving them the most that they can hope for’ (Kozol 376). This statement clearly indicate that the society should accept the inequalities and exercise the same inequalities even in education.

We go to school day after day and see the same things happening. We never have the time to question these things or to even stop and take a second to wonder, is this the right way to handle this or is this what I am supposed to be doing with my life. From the moment we walk through those school doors until we leave at the end of the day there is nothing but competition. There are many different kinds of competition, whether it is in a sport for school or for who has the best academic scores. A second in the day does not go by where there are not two students competing for the winning spot. In Mike Rose, “I Just Wanna Be Average” we are able to see that there is no self-motivation for Rose when he realizes his test scores have been mixed up

Rose writes about his high school educational experiences after he is inadvertently placed in vocational education when the results from his placement tests are confused with another student named Rose. Vocational education is a "euphemism for the bottom level." Rose went to school at a time when tracking, or sorting students by the results of placement tests was common in public education. Rose recounts his experiences in vocational education in order to elaborate on the problems of such system. The author calls the vocational track "a place for those who are just not making it, a dumping ground for the disaffected." To further aggravate Rose's situation his parents lack the capacity or understanding of the educational system in order to question his inappropriate placement. "How would someone like Tommy Rose, with his two years of Italian schooling, know what to ask? And what sort of pressure could an exhausted waitress apply? The error went undetected, and I remained in the vocational track for two years." However the most significant issue raised

Instead, the (mostly poor and mostly minority) students are endlessly drilled and prepped in the core humanities and sciences—lessons their (mostly middle- or upper-income and mostly white) teachers hope will enable the teenagers to rack up high scores on the ACT, SAT, and Advanced Placement exams and go on to attend the four-year college of their dreams (although it’s not always clear whose dreams we’re talking about). On the surface, the tension between college-for-all and career and technical education pits egalitarianism against pragmatism. What could be more egalitarian, after all, than sending the nation’s most disadvantaged secondary students off to the vaunted halls of institutions once reserved for the most privileged? Only eight percent of low-income children in America earn a bachelor’s degree by their mid-twenties, compared to more than 80 percent of students from the top income

Education is something often seen as an equalizer in the face of social injustice. The concept of using school and information to put different people on a level playing field is a noble but misguided attempt at social equality. Education undoubtedly affects the position of people in society positively, while creating an outlet to educate the ignorant, it becomes problematic when education is not an equal opportunity for everyone. In Adrienne Rich’s essay, “Taking Women Students Seriously”, she speaks of the inequality mainly affecting women while subtly hinting at the inequality present in education in regards to race and class. Gender, race and class are three characteristics that work together to create either a positive or negative profile for one’s education.