Unequal Childhoods Critical Analysis

Lareau's Unequal Childhoods: Class, Race, and Family Life reveals some of the root causes of social injustice and inequity in American society. The author's analysis is astute and relevant to current social trends. Taking a structuralist perspective allows Lareau to explore the patterns and normative behaviors within different income categories, to show how those patterns influence inter-generational disparities and perpetuate problems like economic disparity. The gap between rich and poor has widened, and continues to grow in the United States, making Lareau's book an important read (Hargreaves, 2013, p. 1). Fewer than ten percent of poor Americans receive even a four-year degree (Hargreaves, 2013). Income or wealth disparity impacts not only educational attainment but also measurable health outcomes (Hargreaves, 2013). Therefore, it is important to understand the underlying dynamics that lead to inequalities in education and wealth.

In Unequal Childhoods, Lareau talks a lot about language and patterns of communication that are linked to socio-economic status. Children acquire social and cultural capital not via their parent's earnings, but via their behaviors. Behaviors are in turn shaped by reactions to power and authority. The school system is perceived as an authoritative institution linked to power, particularly the power to control and even take children. As Lareau points out, children from poor families learn from their parents that authority structures are to be feared. Parents fear schools, leading them to avoid confrontation and interaction with teachers and administrators. The children likewise learn and internalize their parents' fears and do not grow up challenging the system or their role in it.

Lareau describes social class and inequality as being interrelated. In fact, a feedback loop exists whereby social class informs patterns of inequality; inequality likewise reinforces social class. Using a case study methodology, Lareau is able to offer the reader details about the feedback dynamic and how it plays itself out on a daily basis. The link between social class and inequality is a complex and longitudinal one, which is why quantitative data is not necessarily beneficial for illustrating the gamut of the problem, its causes, and its implications. Readers are likely to find truth in at least a few of the case studies, which reflect the experiences of many Americans. Laraeu's argument is strong, and it is difficult to find fault with the reasoning or the methodology used in the book.

It is clear, based on personal observations, quantitative data, and media exposes, that children in the United States do receive unequal childhoods based on socio-economic class. Although race is linked inextricably to socio-economic class, Lareau shows that class trumps race in terms of access to social and cultural capital. Parents need to learn how to challenge authority and empower themselves with the knowledge that their children need to succeed.

The problem with Lareau's analysis is that the question of what to do about inequities remains open. Public policy cannot tell parents how to raise their children. Readers of this book are far more likely to be from middle or upper-middle class backgrounds, given that a large majority of readers are university students and scholars as opposed to lower income mothers. Thus, there is a problem with how to apply the information contained in Unequal Childhoods. This problem does not invalidate the book, but it does call upon the reader to effect social change by setting examples to peers that may be able to transform social norms.

Reference:

Hargreaves, S. (2013). How income inequality hurts America. CNN Money. Retrieved online: http://money.cnn.com/2013/09/25/news/economy/income-inequality/

Lareau's (2003) book Unequal Childhoods provided groundbreaking evidence for "intergenerational transmission of social status," (Cheadle & Amato, 2011, p. 679). The hypothesis, which was supported by Lareau's (2003) qualitative research, was that parenting styles differ significantly between lower social status and higher social status families, and that these parenting styles had a strong bearing not only on academic performance and achievement but also on upward social mobility, or lack thereof. In particular, Lareau (2003) found that lower social status parents were less likely to demonstrate what the researcher calls "concerted cultivation," which is the willingness to interfere with schooling and other institutional entities on behalf of their children. Lower social status parents were also less likely to encourage their children to participate in organized and structured extracurricular activities that might have boosted their children's chances of being recognized by universities. These parenting styles are theoretically internalized and then passed on to future generations, although Lareau's (2003) research is not longitudinal enough to account for multiple generations of effects....

This paper describes the importance of Lareau's (2003) findings, especially in light of updates to the study and peer reviews thereof. My thesis is that social equality depends on the ability to understand and work "the system," or the social norms and institutions that facilitate upward social mobility.
It is impossible to discuss Lareau's (2003) findings without mentioning race. However, Lareau (2003) claims that her research reveals that socio-economic class trumps race as being the most important determining factor of parenting style vis-a-vis concerted cultivation. Since Lareau's (2003) study, though, other researchers have linked racial and ethnic variables to parenting styles and to concerted cultivation in particular. For example, Cheadle & Amato (2011) found that racial and ethnic differences were significant, even when socio-economic status was controlled for in the research. Class and status are directly linked, and race and status are also directly linked.

In Chapter One of Unequal Childhoods, Lareau (2003) defines her terms. The operationalized definitions help guide the reader to understand the core concepts of the research. Concerted cultivation suggests that, "educational and financial resources result in different cultural logics in the approach to parenting," (Dumais, Kessinger & Ghosh, 2012, p. 17). In other words, access to social and cultural capital determines parenting styles. Concerted cultivation refers specifically to parents making a concerted effort to advance the interests of their children, by means such as speaking to principals and teachers when students receive unexpectedly low grades; or by ensuring that their child makes it into several clubs, athletic groups, and other organized activities. Concerted cultivation is the cornerstone of Lareau's research and her most important independent variable. Irwin & Elley (2011) do warn, however, that it is important not to believe in too much homogeneity within any population including populations grouped together by social class.

What is interesting about Lareau's work is that she shows that concerted cultivation is not just about aggressive and proactive parenting. Concerted cultivation also has an impact on the child's family and social life, and on the nature of interpersonal relationships in the family. Parents from wealthier backgrounds were more likely to pressure or encourage their children to participate in organized social clubs, but less likely to encourage students to participate in family life. Thus, the child was taught to value achievement in school and in external activities like sports than family relationships. Research revealed that children in middle class families spent less time with their siblings and parents, and were also more hostile and competitive with their siblings (Lareau, 2003, p. 39). The story of Garrett Tallinger illuminates the patterns of middle class families with "hectic schedules of organized activities," (Lareau, 2003, p. 12). Even more notable is the fact that the children from the middle class families were more likely to relate directly to adults, and feel confident when speaking with adults. The children therefore "learn to think of themselves as special and as entitled to receive certain kinds of services from adults," (Lareau, 2003, p. 39). Unlike the Tallinger and other middle class families, lower income families do not have the resources or time to devote to their children's extracurricular activities. As a result, the children have more unstructured playtime, which is used with siblings and friends. Lareau (2003) calls the parenting style of lower income families as fostering "natural growth," because it allows the children to play on their own. Children grow and learn naturally, in separate spheres from adult influence.

The socialization processes for poor vs. wealthy children are drastically different, impacting the way they view the world. Children from wealthier families develop a sense of entitlement early, and are not intimidated by authority figures. As a result, they might be able to negotiate higher salaries and edge their way into fields that a lower income child feels unworthy or unable to access. There are drawbacks to the concerted cultivation approach to parenting, even as there are clear political, economic, and social advantages. The main disadvantage is that children develop what might be poorer social skills. Lareau (2003) found, for instance, that natural growth children are more respectful towards adults, as seen through the story of Harold McAllister and others. Future research should clarify what types of psychological and social psychological impacts the different parenting styles are having on this and successive generations of children.

Lareau (2003) follows a number of different children, each revealing either natural growth or concerted cultivation. Language skills development is a major thread throughout all the stories. For example, the case of Harold McAllister shows that students from lower income households tended to talk…