Education has assumed the traditional classroom-based form of learning for many years. A range of factors is involved in this learning mode that education experts brand the social context of learning. It includes how education and lifelong learning reflect the social, economic, cultural, and political factors that inform the policies, practice, and learning experiences. In the United States, for instance, the social context of education emphasizes the relationship between learning institutions and society by focusing on the role of race and ethnicity, race, gender, as well as a social class in education. In other words, the focus has been on exploring how social policy (work, family structure, health, and others) intersects with schooling to impact education. Based on this, scholars continue to examine how various issues, including student background and social context of public schools, to improve learning.
Social Context of Instruction
Student Background
Children in the United States, the most diversified country in the world, come from families that vary extensively in terms of culture, socioeconomic status, and other factors. That being so, the nation's education system struggles, providing equal learning opportunities for its students. Rosenthal and Jacobson (1968) list ability, sex, age, family structures, parents' education, and family income as major variables. Research shows that students with backgrounds marked by low socioeconomic status and racial minorities tend to have poor educational outcomes. Although the gap between school outcomes in children from poor and minority racial communities compared to their rich counterparts is closing, it remains a serious concern. Student background is a broad phenomenon that comprises a range of factors including student characteristics, race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, family structure, and difficulty or proficiency speaking English.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Student characteristics include their age, ability, and sex. According to Rosenthal and Jacobson (1968), age is a critical factor in determining the extent to which a child can be molded, shaped, or even influenced in an educational setting. According to the researchers, it is easier to educate younger students than their older counterparts due to the high degree influenceability that comes with a more youthful age. Ability in the context of learning refers to the degree to which students differ in profiting from their educators' favorable expectations. It implies that children with high IQ scores or underlying talents are much easier to teach (Rosenthal & Jacobson, 1968). The variable of sex is one that is highly debated in many fields, including learning. Many have argued that sex does not play a significant role in education. However, with empirical evidence showing that boys generally perform better than girls, it is important to pay attention to the role of gender.
The racial makeup of a student also defines the social context of education. McPherson, Smith-Lovin, and Cook (2001) point out that students' racial composition reflects the heterogeneity of culture and language in the country's public schools. The problem with the increased racial composition is that most minority students come from poor and non-English-speaking backgrounds, increasing their risk of not performing better than other children. Because minorities make up a considerable portion of the modern public-school system, it is important to review the role of racial composition in structuring education. It is also projected that the number of minority students aged between 5-17 will grow exponentially compared to Whites in the coming decade.
The proficiency or difficulty of speaking English is also a major factor in learning today. The ability of a student to speak English with ease depends on their ethnic background. Children from White families generally speak English fluently than those from minority cultures such as Latinos, Blacks, Asians, Native Americans, and the likes. Cargile, Giles, Ryan, and Bradac (1994) argue that children who communicate in a language other than English at home have difficulties expressing themselves in English at school. Although English is the dominant language in the United States, by law, learning institutions must provide additional services to students who face difficulties speaking English (Cargile, Giles, Ryan, & Bradac, 1994). Children having problems speaking English are mostly immigrants or children born of immigrant parents. Since the language is one of the most powerful instruments in learning, actors in the education system must address the problem of language attitude towards non-English speakers.
Studies also demonstrate the relationship between the socioeconomic status of students and their likelihood of success in school. Socioeconomic status, whether in the form of level of education, family income, or even occupational prestige, shows that children from low socioeconomic status families are more likely to fail. The difference in the school performance in the minority groups is determined by the extent to which families differ in socioeconomic status. The nation's socioeconomic status is composed of three primary classes – low, middle, and high. The middle class is the largest group in the country with the short class filled with minority groups who mainly include Blacks, Hispanics, and Native Americans. These are also the groups with the worst-performing students in public schools. Interestingly, the poverty rate in the United States is the highest of any industrialized nation.
Another element of socioeconomic status that is vital to education is the level of education of parents. Although education level in increasing across families in the United States, it is still a major issue in minority groups, with African Americans and Latinos being the most affected. A significant portion of Black and Hispanic parents have not gone past high school education. Because of this, there is a growing trend of their children not attaining a college degree. White people generally have graduated from college degrees, indicating the high rate of completion of college in White children. There is a direct correlation between the level of family education and the degree of school success in children.
Family structure, as mentioned earlier in the text, is critical in shaping education. Taylor, Ntoumanis, and Smith (2009) associate family structure and educational outcomes with the following: two biological or adoptive parents, one biological and one stepparent, one biological or adoptive parent, and other kinsfolks serving as family structures. According to Taylor, Ntoumanis, and Smith (2009), children from two families with both biological or adoptive parents present are more likely to succeed in school than those from homes with single parents or raised by other relatives. It is mainly because homes with both parents provide a supportive environment to enhance education. Single parents usually play both parents' role in terms of facilitating their children's education in providing resources or creating time to assist them. Another factor of family structure critical to a child's education is the average level of education and socioeconomic status.
Public Schools
The social context of instruction is not complete without considering the variation of schooling environment across low and high poverty learning institutions. Fayolle, Gailly, and Lassas-Clerc (2006) observe that learner performance is influenced by other pupils' instructive aspirations in addition to backgrounds at the school. Institutions with a great concentration of students from low-income backgrounds tend to perform poorly educationally. Minority pupils are also more probable to join schools within high poverty communities than their white peers. The difference is attributed to the socioeconomic composition of the United States population, where whites are more financially stable than minority races. Public schools' social context can be analyzed based on two dimensions – learning environment in high and low poverty institutes and resource equity in these high and low poverty institutions.
Learning Environment in High and Low Poverty Schools
Studies show that how teachers perceive the learning environment in such schools determine the extent to which learning occurs. Taylor, Ntoumanis, and Smith (2008) report that teachers from schools with a high level of poverty are not satisfied with learning conditions than those from schools with low poverty. It is because student misbehaviors, including fighting, verbal abuses, horseplay, and noise, are common in high poverty schools than low poverty schools. Such misbehaviors interrupt learning, thus limiting school performance outcomes. It is despite some teachers reporting that their principals develop and enforce policies on student behavior and practices. High poverty schools experience some level of uncontrollability of student behavior mainly because of the teacher to student ratio marked by many students in such schools.
High poverty schools are also more probable to experience cases of student nonattendance than low poverty schools. Taylor, Ntoumanis, and Smith (2008) argue that the amount of time students spend in classrooms is a critical determinant in their access to education. It is so because students lose the opportunity to gain knowledge or skills when they miss classes partially or entirely because of absenteeism, lateness, of cutting classes. Additionally, when students disrupt learning when they miss classes, which further interferes with other students' academic progression. Absenteeism in high poverty schools is attributed to a diverse range of factors, some of which may include the inability to attend schools, drugs, crime, parental influence, peer pressure, or even lack of interest.
Parental involvement in high poverty public schools is also a major concern. Educating a child is a complex task that requires effective participation and active collaboration between teachers, school administration, and a child's parents or caregiver. Education does not begin or end in the classroom. What is taught in the class must be demonstrated beyond the school. It is where parents come in. Schools with a high poverty rate are four times more likely to report a lack of parent involvement than other schools. Teachers in these schools make less effort to reach out to parents. On the other hand, parents also make less effort to get involved in their children's academic activities at school. The relationship between educators and parents in these schools contributes to the poor performance students produce.
Resource Equity Across High and Low Poverty Schools
The fairness in which resources (financial and non-financial) are shared between public schools is a serious determinant of educational success. The measurement of resource equity depends on factors such as the class size, expenditures on students, teacher qualifications, and services offered (Quansah, 2012). The degree of fairness in allocating human and financial resources determines the level of educational opportunities accorded to students in high and low poverty schools. Notably, children in schools defined by extreme poverty are less likely to experience talented and extended-day learning programs. In most cases, a learning institution's educational services and programs are not entirely designed to meet students' educational needs. Still, they are also affected by the number of resources at their disposal. The difference in the capability with which schools deploy learning, to a large extent, is determined by the number of resources allocated to them.
On the same theme, research also suggests that students in poverty-stricken schools are more likely to be taught by teachers who never majored in those subjects. For instance, most public schools in poor neighborhoods have teachers with minimal or less experience in mathematics teaching students the topic. Teacher qualification and experience in public schools is a pressing issue in attaining quality education in public schools. The reduced number of teachers contributes to teachers teaching subjects they never majored in than the high numbers of students. There are not enough teachers with a concrete educational background in science, mathematics, humanity, and other disciplines to offer quality education in poor schools. Because of the problems associated with high poverty schools, teachers are less likely to seek employment in such schools.
Teacher salaries, internet access, and overall education expenditures are poor in schools concentrated by poor children. Compensation and benefits is an excellent instrument for attracting and retaining quality educators in public schools. On average, teachers in poor public schools earn 28 percent less than those in less poor schools (Quansah, 2012). Access to the internet improves learning by introducing students to multiple educational opportunities. Public schools in poor communities are less likely to have reliable internet access. It is a problem of resource insufficiency to afford internet connection and online learning capabilities. It also points to the problem of educational expenditure, which is worse in high poverty schools (Quansah, 2012). There is a huge disparity between schools in good neighborhoods and those in poor communities when it comes to buying power. As mentioned earlier in the text, poor schools have limited financial resources, which limits their expenditure.
Social Contexts of Instruction and Online Learning
The advent of technology in the education sector and the occurrence of global crises such as the ongoing pandemic is seeing a significant evolution of education. The access and delivery of educational programs and services shift from traditional class-based learning to electronic learning. The journey to online education has been slow until it was triggered by the COVID-19 global pandemic, which has redefined the way policymakers and administrators approach learning (Bao, 2020). Today, a majority of learning institutions offer their courses electronically. Although online learning has its benefits such as convenience, affordability, and improved access to learning, it is important not to overlook the role of instruction's social context.
There are numerous advantages associated with social context. McInnerney and Roberts (2004) outline them as a sense of community, presentation of self, and art of good communication. When people gather with a singular social structure that is learning, it creates a sense of belonging. Students benefit from a sense of belonging, which improves their ability to succeed in class-based learning. The presentation of self improves learning in numerous ways. Students are more increasingly able to engage their instructors, various learning activities and exercises can be performed, it becomes easier to monitor performance, and participation of both students and instructors is improved (McInnerney & Roberts, 2004). Social context creates a synchronized forum for learning, enhancing communication between students and between teachers and students.
The social context of education is undergoing massive change, especially due to the ongoing circumstances. Family structures are evolving, socioeconomic status is improving due to growing median income, the percentage of students from minority groups is growing with that of dominant groups dropping, and technology is changing the way children access learning. However, the levels of poverty in public schools remain a major talking point as far as the delivery of quality education is concerned. As the discussion demonstrates, high poverty schools have limited internet access. Since the world is migrating to online learning, many students in these schools will be locked away from educational opportunities.
References
Bao, W. (2020). COVID‐19 and online teaching in higher education: A case study of Peking University. Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies , 2 (2), 113-115.
Cargile, A. C., Giles, H., Ryan, E. B., & Bradac, J. J. (1994). Language attitudes as a social process: A conceptual model and new directions. Language & Communication , 14 (3), 211-236.
Fayolle, A., Gailly, B., & Lassas-Clerc, N. (2006). Effect and counter-effect of entrepreneurship education and social context on student's intentions. Estudios De Economía Aplicada , 24 (2), 509-524.
Hoi, S. C., Sahoo, D., Lu, J., & Zhao, P. (2018). Online learning: A comprehensive survey. arXiv preprint arXiv:1802.02871 .
McInnerney, J. M., & Roberts, T. S. (2004). Online learning: Social interaction and the creation of a sense of community. Journal of Educational Technology & Society , 7 (3), 73-81.
McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Cook, J. M. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual review of sociology , 27 (1), 415-444.
Rosenthal, R., & Jacobson, L. (1968). Pygmalion in the classroom. The urban review , 3 (1), 16-20.
Shaw, K. (2018). Designing online learning opportunities, orchestrating experiences and managing learning. In Teaching & Learning Online (pp. 175-181). Routledge.
Taylor, I. M., Ntoumanis, N., & Smith, B. (2009). The social context as a determinant of teacher motivational strategies in physical education. Psychology of Sport and Exercise , 10 (2), 235-243.
Quansah, R. (2012). Social Context & Its Influence on Performance in School.
