Factory to Faculty: Socioeconomic Difference and the Educational Experiences of University Professors

Abstract

Numerous essays exist on the lived experiences of academics from working-class or poverty-class origins. Yet, to date, there exists no systematic analysis of the class origins of university faculty members. This study utilizes surveys from a random sample of full-time university professors at all 95 Canadian universities affiliated with the Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada (AUCC) to analyze the ways in which socioeconomic background impacts experiences within university and graduate school. Findings indicate that several measures of socioeconomic background are indeed significant predictors of this experience. Qualitative data reveal that working-class faculty members are hyper-aware of the ways in which their class backgrounds affected their educational trajectories; while conversely, academics from middle-class backgrounds were also reflective about the ways in which they were privileged. The paper concludes with implications for developing public policy that shifts focus away from apolitical discussions of diversity, toward promoting inclusivity for those from working-class or lower-income backgrounds. Il existe de nombreux travaux concernant les expériences vécues par des académiques qui font parties de différentes classes sociales, particulièrement les classes ouvrières. Par contre, jusqu'à date, il n'existe aucune analyse systématique concernant les classes d'origines des membres du corps professoral qui travaillent aux universités. Cette étude utilise des enquêtes qui ont été obtenues avec un échantillon aléatoire de professeurs qui travaillent à temps plein aux 95 universités Canadiennes affiliées avec "L'association des Universités et Collèges du Canada" (AUCC). Cette étude analyse les façons que le statut socio-économique de la famille affecte les expériences à l'université et aux études supérieures. Les résultats quantitatifs démontrent que plusieurs mesures de statut socio-économique prédisent ces expériences. En plus, les résultats qualitatifs démontrent que les membres du corps professoral qui viennent la classe ouvrière sont très conscients des façons que leur statut socio-économique affecte leurs trajectoires académiques. Par contre, les membres du corps professoral qui viennent la classe moyenne sont aussi conscients et même réfléchissant des façons qu'ils sont privilégiés à cause de leur statut socio-économique. Les résultats indiquent la nécessité de développer des politiques publiques qui détourne l'attention et les discussions apolitiques sur la diversité, aux discussions sur les façons de promouvoir, aux universités, l'inclusion de ceux qui viennent des milieux socio-économiques inférieurs et défavorisés.

“You Always Remain Slightly an Outsider”: Workplace Experiences of Academics from Working‐Class or Impoverished Backgrounds

“…Those who have moved seamlessly upward may well have selected out of our study. Nonetheless, our qualitative data build on Haney's () quantitative results, showing that at least some Canadian academics from working‐class and impoverished family backgrounds struggle with upward social mobility. Exploring intersecting marginalized identities would enrich understandings of subtle forms of social exclusion in higher education.…”

“…While some people were isolated in their own universities, and some more broadly in their disciplines, many also described a growing distance from their working‐class families as they immersed in the social field of the academy. As Haney (:177) found in his survey of working‐class academics, families may resent being unable to understand their adult children's work lives, and in turn academics may struggle against being perceived as snobbish. Some conversational topics become off‐limits or awkward.…”

“…Their income was clearly middle‐class or higher, yet their habitus and cultural capital made for an awkward fit. As Haney (:175) notes, class is possibly the one form of social inequality where people work hard to escape social membership; other forms allow far less mobility. But escape also entails losses.…”

“…But moral boundary marking, defining a “good person,” is multidirectional; the lower classes, too, assert their worth and dignity relative to others, signaling virtues like thrift and work ethic as distinguishing them from the “unscrupulous” or “lazy” upper classes (Lamont ). As Haney () found, some working‐class academics work hard to display middle‐class affiliation, while others signal pride in working‐class identity.…”

“…On the other hand, reliance on higher education to effect class equality requires working‐class individuals to assimilate into the very structures that oppress them in order to achieve social mobility, an “optimistic fantasy” that can never truly address class‐based inequality (Reay :102) and may reproduce it (Haney ). While many scholars have attended to the experiences of working‐class university students (Devlin ; Lehmann , , ; Reay ), most of the literature that examines the experiences of faculty from working‐class backgrounds is autobiographical.…”