The impact of social class on parent–professional interaction in school exclusion processes: deficit or disadvantage?

Abstract

Although a great deal of previous literature has explored the ways in which social class affects parental engagement in educational processes, there has been surprisingly little discussion of the way in which social class shapes the parent–professional interaction that occurs in school exclusion processes specifically. School exclusion processes are complex and those parents who become involved in them have to negotiate not only the formal processes that surround the use of permanent and fixed-term exclusion but also the less well-regulated and increasingly favoured processes that are associated with the use of alternatives to exclusion from school. This paper draws on the perspectives of professionals working in a wide variety of roles and contexts in one local authority in England and on those of a small number of mothers of children with longer and more complex histories of involvement in school exclusion processes. It argues for greater recognition of the impact of social class on parent–professional interaction in school exclusion processes because of the way in which it helps to perpetuate an intergenerational cycle of social and educational disadvantage

Track recommendation bias: Gender, migration background and SES bias over a 20‐year period in the Dutch context

“…Given equal performance on the school leavers' tests, students from low-SES families consistently had fewer opportunities to enter the higher secondary education tracks. This finding may be an indication of the differences in positioning, knowledge and power in the educational decision-making processes between high and low-SES families (Gazeley, 2012). Differences in track recommendations may remain for several reasons, including teachers consistently taking into account parents' ability and resources to support their children (Ditton et al, 2005;B€ ohmer et al, 2017) and the limited power of low-SES parents' interactions with educational professionals (Gazeley, 2012).…”

Educational inclusion/exclusion of Turkish immigrant youth in Vancouver, Canada: a critical analysis

“…class position changes which result from immigration) and permanent (i.e. class origin prior to migration), are significant, because there is a strong association between social class and educational attainment (Gillborn 1997;Gazeley 2012). Similarly, the impact of class, gender and religion on the educational achievement/marginalisation of Turkish immigrant youth needs further scrutiny as my data indicate that three students who did not complete their education (two students from high school and one from university) were from workingclass Muslim families.…”

Exclusions, barriers to admission and quality of mainstream provision for children and young people with SEND: what can be done?

“…They are expected to support professionals and do 'the right' things even when these are only tacitly expressed and their difficulty unacknowledged. This includes such things as the practical, financial and emotional implications of having to attend frequent meetings (Gazeley, 2012). On the one hand, parents are made accountable for sending their children to schooland imprisoned in instances where they do notbut on the other hand they are made accountable for monitoring behaviour when periods of exclusion mean they cannot.…”

“…On the one hand, parents are made accountable for sending their children to schooland imprisoned in instances where they do notbut on the other hand they are made accountable for monitoring behaviour when periods of exclusion mean they cannot. While there might be an assumption of equal treatment, decisions about whether to exclude or not are informed by judgements about the kind of support that might be given and unexpressed assessments of such things as family structure, gender and social class (Gazeley, 2012). The situation for young people cared for by the state is even more paradoxical when it comes to accountability, as national policies make it clear that exclusions are undesirable yet this group continues to be disproportionately at risk.…”