Unequal Childhoods - Annette Lareau [188]
Moreover, as the children moved from fourth grade into adulthood, the power of class pushed their lives in such different directions that I could not pose the same interview questions to the group as a whole. Middle-class youths’ interviews were filled with questions about their college preparation classes, college searches, college choice, and college adjustment. As these young people told their stories, additional probing revealed that their parents had been an integral part of their transition to college. Working-class and poor youths’ interviews were filled with discussions of their difficulties in high school, challenges at work, and uncertain future goals. Some working-class and poor youth had undertaken college searches and enrolled in community college courses, but they had done so mainly on their own or with heavy involvement by teachers. Their parents had more circumscribed roles. The follow-up study suggests that over time the gap that existed between the families when the children were ten widened rather than narrowed.
Of course, there is significant variation among the members of all social classes. Some middle-class youth, like Melanie, have learning disabilities or other issues that lead them to not attend college. This in turn may limit their career chances and result in downward mobility—meaning that these individuals wind up in jobs that have lower prestige and lower pay than the ones held by their parents.70 Some working-class and poor youth, often with the assistance of an influential teacher, become first-generation college students. Armed with college degrees, they are able to defy the odds and become upwardly mobile. What is crucial to keep in mind, however, is that these are examples of variations. They tell us about what sometimes happens, not about the norm. As the lives of the families in Unequal Childhoods show, social class origins have effects that are powerful and long lasting. Middle-class families’ cultural practices, including their approach to child rearing, are closely aligned with the standards and expectations—the rules of the game—of key institutions in society. By contrast, relying on professionals to manage their children’s careers is an eminently reasonable decision for working-class and poor parents who have never been to college. But a reasonable decision is not necessarily an advantageous one. In schools especially, today’s institutional rules of the game require parents to be actively involved in order to maximize opportunities for their children. Despite their love for their children, it is harder for working-class and poor families, whose cultural practices and approaches to child rearing are not fully in sync with the institutional standards of schools, to comply with those standards. Finally, it is important to recognize that in American society, people who are blessed with class advantages tend to be unaware of these benefits and privileges. Instead, drawing on the American belief in individualism, they stress their own hard work and talent. They downplay, or do not even notice, the social class benefits bestowed upon them. Americans have, haltingly, developed a rudimentary language that allows us to “see” and discuss racial and ethnic inequalities. But with respect to social class inequalities, which are equally powerful, we remain largely blind and nearly mute.71
CHAPTER 14
Reflections on Longitudinal
Ethnography and the
Families’ Reactions to
Unequal Childhoods
You slurred us, Annette; you made us look like poor
white trash. (Mr. Yanelli’s reaction to reading Unequal Childhoods)
In qualitative research, the way the researcher acts in the field is inextricably connected to data quality. Thus, by tradition qualitative researchers often share the “story behind the story.”1 Throughout my career, I have contributed to this tradition by sharing the missteps that are inevitable in a research