Social Class and the Hidden Curriculum of Work Reading Response

In “Social Class and the Hidden Curriculum of Work” the author, Jean Anyon, produces an argument which elaborates on the presence of a massive gap in the quality of education between schools in wealthy communities and the quality of education in schools in poor communities. Typically, the resources in which are distributed to the schools in these communities are the topic of discussion, but in this case Anyon dares to be different by challenging the teaching methods and philosophies of education incorporated in these schools. Anyon’s curiosity of these school’s social differences leads her to observe the different teaching methods and student outputs in five different fifth-grade classrooms within five different elementary schools. Anyon, through her investigations, permits herself to classify schools in four categories. There is the “Working Class Schools”, “Middle-Class Schools”, “Affluent Professional School” and “Executive Elite School”. Just as in any other society, the working-class schools linger at the bottom of the socio-economic ladder while the executive elite school, on the other hand, flourishes at the top of the socio-economic ladder. Anyon concluded that students with different economic backgrounds are being prepared to serve roles based on their place on the socio-economic ladder.

According to Anyon, in the middle-class school good grades are dependent upon getting a sufficient amount of correct answers. Effort is encouraged, but one is mostly tested on whether they can follow directions in order to acquire the correct answers. Obtaining the correct answers often requires some type of self-decision-making. For example, as a student, it would behoove me to understand the context of the directions and produce an answer without the assistance of my teacher. Answers are often given by the teachers, which requires you to listen intensively and take notes, or in books which requires further research outside of your teacher’s lecture. Also, answers, which frequently consist of “words, sentences, numbers, or facts and dates”, are hypothetically factual and in chronological order.  Subjects that are generally taught by teachers such as, math, social studies and language arts all focus on meeting a universal objective. This universal objective is to assure that the student thoroughly understands what he or she is undertaking.  In math, when a teacher clarifies the correct way of doing a math problem, there is “recognition that a cognitive process” has occurred and he or she wants to make sure that you understand what you are doing so you may obtain the correct answers. Furthermore, Social studies often incorporate the reading of an event and understanding what you have read. Lastly, language arts empower you to improve your grammar and to speak and write properly. All of these factors leads to Anyon’s argument that middle-class schools fail to analyze how and why things happen. They steer away from topics that will spark the curiosity of children. Middle-class schools are unsuccessful with considering the critical perspective of children because they believe that the children’s critical perspective will create controversy; specifically with parents. In result these teachers do not further elaborate on the lesson plans in the curriculum. There is little attention paid to the creativity in children’s schoolwork. Decisions made by the teachers are based on “external rules and regulations”. It is sad to say that the interest and feelings of the children are put on hold so they can prepare for college or a job.

I believe that Jean Anyon argued her point well that students with different economic backgrounds are being prepared to serve roles based on their place on the socio-economic ladder. Anyon described the different levels of school and she used valid points and examples to support her argument. She must assume that the reason why there is such a vast gap between the qualities of education in the different communities is because of the level of financial support and the inside sources within each community. Poor communities lack the support and teaching methods that wealthy communities possess. What action is our country taking today to diminish this gap? Will the reduction of this gap lower competition in other countries and enable us to focus on the prosperity of our economy?

In conclusion, I agree with Jean Anyon’s argument. I believe that her curiosity of these school’s social differences has enlightened the audience of how the school systems operate depending on your community. Also, I agree that middle-class schools fail to incorporate the critical perspective and creativity of children in their school work. Hypothetically, if schools focused more on the interest of children it would bring communities together and enable them to see their similarities rather than their differences.

“It may be shocking, however, to learn how vast the differences in schools are - not so much in resources as in teaching methods and philosophies of education.” I chose this as my golden line because it indicates to the audience that we are misinterpreting the issue in schools today. The issues lie within our teaching methods and the lack of our countries support of poor communities and not in the lack of resources provided to schools.