"HIGHBROW” cultural pursuits such as theatre trips or museum visits have no impact on children’s GCSE performance, new analysis has found.
Researchers from the universities of Sussex and Edinburgh found that while children’s reading habits had an impact on exam grades, visits to museums or historical sites had no correlation with high grades at GCSE.
Using data from the National Pupil Database, linked to figures from Understanding Society – the UK Household Longitudinal Study, the researchers found family cultural outings had no statistically significant impact on grades. The research will be published in the British Journal of Sociology of Education.
The study of 736 pupils in English state schools from 2009-10 to 2012-13 finds that engaging in reading-related activities is “mildly influential” on pupils’ achievements, but that “engagement in highbrow cultural activities are not”.
READ MORE: Pandemic hit Scotland's poorest students hardest, education stats reveal
“This is an important finding as the concept of cultural capital has become more prominent in Government education policy,” it adds.
“Cultural capital” is an idea developed by French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu, which argues that disadvantaged pupils are not exposed to the same range of cultural experiences as their better-off peers.
Wealthier children are taken by their parents to museums, galleries and the theatre, which makes them not just economically but culturally more advantaged, the theory suggests.
In 2019, schools inspectorate Ofsted included the phrase in its guidance for the first time. “As part of making the judgment about quality of education, inspectors will consider the extent to which schools are equipping pupils with the knowledge and cultural capital they need to succeed in life,” it said.
It added: “It is essential knowledge pupils need to be educated citizens, introducing them to the best that has been thought and said, and helping to engender an appreciation of human creativity and achievement.”
The study did find that parents’ and children’s reading habits and activities, such as borrowing books from the library, had a significant impact on grades: “Engaging in two or three reading activities, on average, increases the pupil’s GCSE score by between seven and nine points.
“The size of this effect should not be overlooked, since an extra GCSE pass at grade A* is worth eight points.”
However, reading activities explained between 4% and 5% of the differences in GCSE grades, while parents’ social class background had a much stronger impact on grades.
“It is beguiling to believe that increasing pupils’ levels of cultural capital will have a positive influence on GCSE outcomes,” the researchers said, adding that it was “tempting to theorise that visits to museums or historic venues might be helpful in igniting interests in history, and that visits to the theatre might similarly cultivate learning in drama”.
However, they said their findings “do not lend any support to the view that increasing cultural capital will reduce the size of social class inequalities in school GCSE outcomes”.
They added that “if schools are serious about reducing educational inequalities” then “schools would be better placed to concentrate on increasing reading activities.”
They added that targeted policy interventions should address the “stark social class attainment gaps, which are consistently observed in school GCSE outcomes”.
The Government’s social mobility commissioner, Katharine Birbalsingh, said teachers should not assume that they could draw knowledge out of pupils, rather than teaching them material directly – as this would benefit middle-class students.
“A more middle-class child can go home and will sit down at the dinner table with their parents and they will talk about the politics of the day, read the books that are on the shelves; mum and dad might take out the newspaper,” she said. “But the more disadvantaged child does not.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel