家庭优势：社会阶层与家长参与

by Annette Lareau, 安妮特·拉鲁, 吴重涵 (Translator)

《家庭优势：社会阶层与家长参与》作者是宾夕法尼亚大学著名的社会学家安妮特·拉鲁（Annette Lareau）教授，她对美国家庭教育子女问题进行了广泛、深入和持久的田野研究，2012年当选为美国社会学学会主席。拉鲁的另一本著作《不平等的童年》于2010年由北京大学出版社出版，已为国内读者所熟知。

本书采用质性研究方法，通过对科尔顿（Colton）和普雷斯科特（Prescott）两所小学的家长、老师和学生的访谈和观察，生动地展示了美国社会不同阶层中家长参与子女教育的画卷：家长作为社会阶层的一员，如何将所具有的优势传递给他们的子女。作者以富有感染力的笔触，描述了劳作阶层和中产阶层的家长都希望帮助他们的子女在学校教育中取得成功，然而，处于不同社会阶层的家长能够使用的教育资源种类和数量的不同，导致了他们教育参与的能力不同，因而参与行为的广泛性和深度也大为不同。本书的突出特点，是创造性地刻画了家长大量不起眼但却十分重要的社会行动方式，极富洞察力地考察了这些细微社会行为的社会意义，揭示了行为背后社会分层机制的作用。

本书也是学习质性研究方法的范例，是一部优秀的教育质性研究报告。其中的“附录”占全书近五分之一的篇幅，为我们讲述了作者所亲历的质性研究过程的生动故事，值得一读。相信对质性研究方法的使用者和学习者会有所启发。

Genres: Education, Nonfiction, Sociology

314 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1989

Reviews

[Juli Taylor · Rating 5 out of 5]

An interesting sociological investigation into what teachers actually want from parents, and the extent to which parents social class impacts their abilities to meet those demands.

[L.C. · Rating 1 out of 5]

A very overrated attempt at validation of the writers efforts.

[Christine · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book faces the importance of social class in how American families approach school. It was originally written in 1989, and studied schools where social classes did not seem mixed (separate towns/cities). This somewhat limits how useful the educational policy recommendations in the back might be to my own context, however there were still many useful points.

1. Middle class parents do not set out simply to display their cultural resources. They are trying to pass these resources on to their children. They know that children will not automatically attain the same social status as their parents unless they do well in school.

2. Working class parents also believe that their children won't necessarily attain the same social status as themselves, and recognize that doing well in school will help children succeed in later life as well. This means of course that both groups care a great deal about how well their children do in school, but...

3. Working class parents have fewer resources to bring to bear to understand their children's school experience and less confidence to shape it. They see the teachers as professionals and trust them to have the children's best interests in mind. They use extrinsic markers like grades, stickers and comments on papers to track how their kids are doing in school. Since teachers almost always try to be positive they do not always recognize when a child is falling behind. Middle class parents are more interested in what their child knows and understands than necessarily in the grade mark.

4. Middle class parents differ in the conditions under and the extent to which they activate their cultural resources to shape their children's school experience. Being equally or more educated than teachers they evaluate teachers' performance. They may obtain supplemental experiences (tutoring, lessons, etc.) if they feel their child isn't getting all they need at school and/or they may be more likely to make requests of the school (for special programs, specific teachers, etc...). Middle class parents were most likely to activate their resources for a low-achieving child.

6. Only certain kinds of parental involvement are desired by schools. Mainly: nurturing the child at home and sending them to school fed and groomed, reading to them, reinforcing behavior standards and respecting the teacher. Parents differ in their ability to do these things. Also middle class parents were more likely to not back up the teacher's discipline and to criticize the school or teacher for their educational program. Working class parents' criticisms were typically not about the academic program. Getting deeply involved in a child's inner life and school career can cause stress for the child and even exacerbate sibling rivalry or even marital tensions for some middle class families. By leaving schooling to the school, Lareau says working class families protected themselves from this particular kind of stress.

7. Teachers tried to be fair, but it seems that their expectations and even perceptions of children were colored by the involvement of their parents. I recall reading this as advice in Sara Lawrence Lightfoot's book, _The Essential Conversation: what parents and teachers can learn from each other_. She said get involved, go to all conferences, PTA nights, etc--it will help the teacher see your family/child in a better light.

8. Lareau suggests that parent involvement "pays off" more in a school where it is rarer. In a school where most of the parents are busily involved, the parents end up competing for what then become scarce resources.

9. Lareau also looks at the parents networks, suggesting that the middle class parents were more likely to form relationships with one another whereas working class parents socialized more with their kin groups. Whether among their friends or relatives, middle class parents were more likely to know (or be)change agents like principals, teachers, media, lawyers, judges, etc and thus informally learned how to meet criteria. She suggests teachers might invite an involved working class parent to bring a relative or friend with her the next time she volunteers as an example of how to leverage existing networks into a sort of mentoring system to expand parental involvement among the working class.

10. While this research added to knowledge of an intra-institutional relationship (home to school), it would be interesting in my context to see how a mix of middle and working class families in one school can work well. What are the advantages and disadvantages. Even if a family is working for a particular child, does this improve the environment for all children. I know many middle class parents who consciously strive to upgrade their child's school environment with all students in mind (but then again see #8...).

Overall, an interesting book worth thinking about even 21 years later...

[Doug · Rating 3 out of 5]

I was impressed how this book attempts to bring attention to the inequities of society in the education system when comparing socioeconomic status (SES). Unfortunately, I didn't really find myself inspired or more fluent by the end of the book. Lareau reveals some basic differences between two schools that are supposed to represent two SES brackets, and as general principles they were informative. However, it bothered me that she seems to imply that these two schools can be representative of the spectrum of the national system. (She seems to be drawing grandiose conclusions without collecting enough data, which arguably may be an early step in a more extensive research process).

The book, for me, boils down to the fact that in some areas families (often with limited education themselves) should be encouraged to participate in early and middle school for the benefit of their children, whereas in areas you would expect higher parent involvement (high SES, parents with more degrees) teachers may feel threatened and imposed upon to the detriment of the classroom. As in many educational policy debates, there is no panacea and attention must be paid to the diversity of the system and its varied constituents.

[Sarah Jane Wood · Rating 3 out of 5]

It's always difficult for me to rate books like Home Advantage (i.e. books that are more like 200+ page research papers than literature). I usually find the content fascinating, but the writing is almost universally dull. This book is no exception. Lareau's writing is horribly redundant. It's tedious to read. There are also A LOT of glaring typos. However, the content is absolutely worthwhile. Lareau demonstrates quite well that social class is not an accurate predictor of a parent's educational values or parent involvement in school. Her case studies of upper-middle-class parents/children also point out the many downsides of parent involvement, a topic that most previous research ignored. In short, I am glad I read this book but not because it was entertaining.

[Sarah · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is a great topic, and the author provides much material to think about and to learn from as a teacher and as a parent. The only thing I didn't like about this book is the rampant grammar errors. If you're a stickler for things like that, you may find it tough to get through. But the book is worth reading.

[Slim · Rating 5 out of 5]

I actually had Annette Lareau as a Professor at Temple University. She sucked. I hated her as a teacher. Another Professor used this book in his class, and only then did I realize that she's an extremely talented sociologist. I HIGHLY recommend her book.

[Elke · Rating 4 out of 5]

appendix especially useful...

[Barbara Lovejoy · Rating 4 out of 5]

This books is a great complement to the other books we have been using to know how to best engage our Hispanic and/or low socioeconomic families at Esperanza.