SUBMITTED BY:

RONALD A. SATO
MAT-SCIENCE EDUCATION





SUBMITTED TO: DR. HENRY M. AGONG
PROFESSORIAL LECTURER






Social stratification is an important concept in sociology and foundation of education, and has
many definitions which revolve around it and being a socially constructed concept which is
based on structured inequality; the inequality may be in the form of income and wealth, an
individuals biological or ethnic make-up, or may be as a result of age, gender or disability . In
addition, the inequalities exist among persons and between social groups with respect to the
access of education, acquisition and distribution of scarce and valued resources resulting in a
somewhat rigid subdivision of a society into a hierarchy of layers. The effects of social
stratification are experienced by people and organizations on a daily basis so that the formal
education system is not immune to its associated inequalities. As a result, the factors of social
stratification, which are generally identified as power, class, status and highest education among
others, have many implications to educational system as a whole and towards teaching/learning
environment and individual social class in classroom settings. At a political power level, I will
attempt to show how the factors of social stratification can affect teacher performance in
secondary high schools here in the Philippines. First, I can cite the example of applying as entry
level teaching position. Many teachers complained that inequalities of ranking system in public
schools are rampant. The ranking system is categorized as rank A, B and C D and so on. As fresh
graduate without experienced in teaching yet, you are lucky if your rank is at A or B. That means
you have the greater chance to be hired as a teacher in no time. Unfortunately, the inequalities
comes in when you are in the rank B and the rank C is the first one that is being hired. Why is it
happening? It is happening because we have different system called Palakasan system that is
currently being practice in most schools. It is a political system that is biased and is not following
the hierarchy of ranking based on performance or scores. How does this affect the teachers
performance in secondary high schools? In terms of qualification, it is clearly unfair that
sometimes teachers being hired not based on performance. What could higher officials do to
lessen this practice? There should be strict implementation between schools and division offices
hire well-qualified applicants.
In our country, we have a contemporary or plural society where different religions, cultures and
so on come together to form one society. As a result of this diversity, we have many distinct
groups and organizations, some more powerful than others. In the classroom, power, as a factor
of stratification, plays a critical role and affects teacher performance even in the primary school
level of education. One definition of power synonymous with Max Webers definition states that
power means one's capacity to impose.
Educational stratifications also relate the socioeconomic status of parents and greatly affect the
performance of students in school. In most societies, formal schooling is a scarce and unequally
distributed resource and a key way that the social standings of parents affect the social standings,
values, behaviors and lifestyle of their children. Since educational stratification consists of two
conceptually independent dimensions, model of change in educational inequality should be
specified with respect to which dimension they are account for and it should be understood how
selected measures of education stratification reflect the distribution and allocation of school of
their children. Thus, educational attainment of parents measures the ability to send their children
to prestigious universities like La Salle, Ateneo and UP. The main concern of this term paper is
to further understand changes in socioeconomic differences in formal school of Filipino students;
that are to explain the change in the way formal schooling is allocated to persons from various
socioeconomic groups. It is important; therefore government should intervene and provide ways
to make education affordable especially those parents incapable of sending their children to
college. Tuition fees should be based on socioeconomic background of parents. One of the
schools implemented such practices is the University of the Philippines. The tuition fee
computations will be based on socioeconomic background of parents. Before entering into
college, aside from taking entrance examination, students are required to submit source of
income or income tax return.
This section reviews alternative descriptive models of the relationship between social
background of parents and formal schooling of students. It first considers the logistic response
model of grade progression of the students, upon which the analyses based its desirability for
measuring the change and allocation of schooling. Then it also reviews two models of the
background of parents socioeconomic condition and the ability of the students to maintain the
requirements of the schools. In this way, there will be equal distribution of resources to the lower
class family and upper middle class family in terms of access to high quality education. In terms
of logistic approach, educational stratification is conceptualized based on formal schooling and
sequence of transition between grades and performance of the students. For individuals of
varying socio-demographic attributes school attainment and will be measured by a set of grade
progression (School continuation) probabilities which denotes the chances that an individual
students continues to a given level of schooling that he/she completed from the previous level of
study. However students belongs to a lower class family unfortunately most of the time failed to
meet the standard requirements of the schools because parents prefer to let their children work
instead of sending to schools due to their socio-economic background and being financially
unstable that hindered from students to maintain high grades. The effect is mainly because of
genuine differences in associations between measured variables over population and equal
distribution of resources, permits inter-cohort comparison of the effect of socio-economic
origins. Corresponding to the technical issue of model specification of K-12 program is the
substantive issue discussed above which will also add additional burden to all lower and middle
class families in terms of allocation of schooling and budget for the daily needs. To document
and explain the change in the pattern of allocation of formal schooling among socio-economic
groups, parents most probably will sacrifice their childrens education and instead have them
work to help their family needs. Also this will independently change the schooling distribution
requires the estimate of the effects of social origins on school continuation that will most
probably be affected by the overall proportions of students who will continue from one level to
the next. Since denotes social background effects and reflects the association between
socioeconomic background and grade progression at each schooling level and not the schooling
distribution, it is empirical counterpart to the aspect of educational stratification of interest.
Therefore I conclude that, in this term paper, social-economic background greatly affect and
socially categorize the lower class family in terms of educational attainment compare to
middle/upper class family that caused inequality of higher education access.
The observed increase in inequality of educational opportunity is mainly dictated and affected
the political power which is happening nowadays wherein the Pork Barrel scam is the center of
the issue and they were mainly the reason why many Filipinos unable to continue college
because the government chose to privatize state universities and gave authority of each schools
to increase the tuition fees. Instead of allocating more budget and make education affordable,
they pocketed the tax payers money for their own good. The grade regression of all students
socioeconomic groups mainly because of a lot of factors like, unstable job of the parents that
caused financial instability and mostly trigger for the students to stop continuing their studies.
Approaches to change in educational inequality must be addressed by the government by
partnering to private sectors and develop more interconnections in order to encourage provide
more scholarship programs to give fair schooling distribution, educational opportunities that
should be based on the socioeconomic origins. Therefore, socioeconomic problem between
parents will be lessened and they can send their children to prestigious state college and
universities.
Now, Im done tackling the implication of education towards political power and socio-
economic level other Philippine society, I will also site some insights of Education vital for
social mobility.
Educational performance appears to be one of the main barriers which stop people moving out
of poverty. Yet studies indicate that poorer children are still failing to achieve their educational
potential. How should these continuing inequalities be addressed? Policies that focus on early
years, greater school readiness and support for parents are clearly important but research also
points to the multiple structural problems that prevent poor children from achieving their
potential, including the pressing need for more good schools. Parents must consider also the
importance of readiness of their children, physically and emotionally when going to schools.
There is a saying that education begins at home. When education is not addressed at the early
stage of childrenslife, there will be disadvantages. Disadvantaged children are more likely to
arrive at school lacking basic socio-emotional skills. The importance of early child health and
development for later life health and social outcomes is widely accepted. The three chief
domains of early child development are physical, socio-emotional and cognitive domains, and
favorable profiles in these strongly predict whether or not young children are school ready.
Recent work and studies shows that disadvantaged children are more likely to arrive at school
lacking basic socio-emotional skills such as the ability to take part in conversations or to pay
attention to others1. Children from poor households are also less likely to benefit from home
learning activities or have a quiet space in which to study, and more likely to suffer frequent
illnesses due to inadequate housing. Children living in poverty, or with a lack of material
resources, have substantially lower scores in measures of their cognitive ability at ages three, five
and seven years, although the exact causal mechanisms that lead from child poverty to lower
cognitive attainment are still uncertain. This suggests a possible link between poverty and social
immobility in that children living in poverty achieve less at school, which in turn leads them to
gain low levels of qualifications. Lower qualifications mean fewer opportunities in the labour
market which can typically lead to employment in lower paid semi-skilled or unskilled
occupations. Attitudes and behavior of parents matter to educational attainment of their children:
The aspirations, attitudes and behavior of parents and children play an important part in
explaining why poor children typically do worse at school. It is well known that children
growing up in poor families have lower educational attainment than children growing up in
richer families. The research shows that poorer children who performed well in Key Stage tests
at age seven were more likely than better-off children to fall behind by age 11, and poorer
children who performed badly at seven were less likely to improve their ranking compared with
children from better-off backgrounds an important factor behind the widening gap. Exploring
some of the possible explanations for the widening gap during primary school, researchers point
to factors such as parental aspirations for higher education. For example, parental aspirations and
attitudes to education varied strongly by socio-economic position, with 81 per cent of the richest
mothers saying they hoped their nine-year-old would go to university, compared with only 37
per cent of the poorest mothers. The adverse attitudes to education of disadvantaged mothers are
one of the most important factors associated with the lower educational attainment of their
children at age 11. The study also found that young people are more likely to do well at GCSEs
if the young person him/herself has a greater belief in his/her own ability at school; believes that
events result primarily from his/her own behavior and actions; finds school worthwhile; thinks it
is likely that he/she will apply to, and get into, higher education; avoids risky behavior such as
frequent smoking, cannabis use, anti-social behavior, truancy, suspension and exclusion; and
does not experience bullying. Since young people growing up in poor families do less well in all
these respects compared with those in better-off families, this provides some explanation for
their poorer educational attainment by the end of compulsory schooling.
These findings suggest that attitudes and behavior are potentially important links between socio-
economic disadvantage and childrens educational attainment. While drawing policy conclusions
from this evidence must be done with care, this research highlights two major areas where policy
might help to reduce educational inequalities. First, in relation to parents and the family home:
Improving the home learning environment in poorer families (eg, books and reading pre-
school, computers in teen years);
Helping parents from poorer families to believe that their own actions and efforts can lead to
higher education;
Raising families aspirations and desire for advanced education, from primary school onwards.
Second, the childs own attitudes and behaviors:
Reducing childrens behavioral problems, and engagement in risky behaviors;
Helping children from poorer families to believe that their own actions and efforts can lead to
higher education;
Raising childrens aspirations and expectations for advanced education, from primary school
onwards.
Another category of social stratification that hinders students to continue higher education here
in the Philippines is disability. The dramatic recent decrease in the enrollment of students with
disabilities in postsecondary institutions requires counselors and postsecondary education
personnel to become familiar with emerging the educational experience of these students, it is
important to fully understand the interplay of dynamics with this population, including attitudinal
barriers from faculty and issues of students with disabilities during their educational careers
(Lynch & Gussel, 1996). To maximize other students, physical barriers in the environment, and
support barriers, all which impact the postsecondary adjustment of this population and thereby
decrease their likelihood of success. College counselors are in an especially valuable position to
help students with disabilities achieve their highest potential by understanding the situations of
these students as they encounter barriers in college unique to this population. Many students with
disabilities experience frustration with their postsecondary experiences stemming from negative
attitudes from others, physical barriers on campus, a lack of appropriate services and programs,
and funding to improve those services and programs. This can be especially true of students with
invisible disabilities such as learning disabilities, certain mobility disabilities, auditory
disabilities, and psychiatric disabilities, as attitudes from nondisabled individuals often reflect
preconceived opinions as to what a person with a disability can and cannot do, or stereotyped
judgments of ability and stability. The faculty attitude also greatly affects the disable students
success. The successful integration of college students with disabilities requires receptive
attitudes of members in the entire college community, and faculty attitudes toward students with
disabilities are an important influence in students adjustment to college. University faculty may
be susceptible to frequently held stereotypes, which may in turn be a barrier for students
success, and although staff may not overtly express negativity toward these students, they may
lack adequate understanding of specific needs. Some faculty questions the nature of reasonable
accommodations and doubts their ability to effectively teach students with disabilities, or
question whether the student really needs the accommodation at all.
Faculty may find it difficult to accommodate students simply because they lack an understanding
of these students needs or familiarity with campus services. Factors which have been found to
influence faculty attitude include faculty member age, academic discipline, experience teaching
students with learning disabilities, years of teaching experience, and professional rank.
As with all students, students with disabilities have concerns about how to relate to their
professors. Students with disabilities, however, may experience such concerns more frequently
and the problems they encounter with courses may relate to their specific impairments. Attitudes
of faculty and administrators could be a vital element in the success or failure of students with a
disability. Conversely, a lack of understanding of reasonable accommodations and self-doubt
among instructional staff can become barriers to the educational participation for students with
disabilities. On the other hand, Peer Attitudes contributes socio-emotional skills of disable
students. Studies suggest that ablebodied students interact with students with disabilities based
on attitudes and preconceived stereotypes, which vastly affect the social adjustment of these
students in the postsecondary environment. Amsel and Fichten (1988) found that: a) college
students who have had contact with individuals who have a physical disability are more
comfortable during interaction and more at ease with their disabled peers; and b) students with
and without contact have different patterns of thoughts concerning interaction with such
individuals. Additionally, Fichten (1988) suggests when a socially acceptable way of avoiding
contact with students with disabilities exists; students without disabilities will choose this option.
Fichten, Robillard, Judd, and Amsel (1989) further suggest that college students without
disabilities are more uncomfortable interacting with peers with disabilities than with peers
without disabilities, and students with disabilities are more comfortable interacting with peers
with similar disabilities. Physical Barriers greatly affects student disability. One of the many
negative consequences of having a chronic physical health problem is decreased physical
mobility and difficulties in executing everyday activities. It is especially problematic for
nonable-bodied students to navigate a postsecondary campus that is inaccessible.
In summary, Social stratification is happening from one generation to the next. It is a hierarchy
of social status, socio-economic background and power of each one of us in the society where we
belong. Now, the government must do something to maintain equal access towards high quality
education whether students are from lower class with low socio-economic status, students with
disability. It is therefore education should be accessible for all, regardless of power, social status
and ethnic background.