I wanted to go to [a prestigious academic high school]. But my mom said I could only take the Washington or Franklin [offers] because they were in the neighborhood.
Working-class and poor parents also lacked independent sources of information about schools; they were totally dependent on the recommendations of educators. Since the school district did not directly share key pieces of information with parents or students, it was easy for working-class and poor parents to be misinformed. For example, Mr. and Ms. Yanelli very much wanted Billy to attend Henry Vocational School, a highly respected magnet high school. Ms. Yanelli was stunned when she realized that she had not fully understood the admission procedures:
Henry was like the most decent school around here, but Henry wouldn’t accept him. And I thought it would go by [Billy’s grades in] eighth [grade], but it went by seventh.
The Yanelli family knew important pieces of information, namely that Billy would need to apply to high school and that Henry High School was more desirable than Lower Richmond High School. They also worked to make sure that the application was filled out and submitted. Nevertheless, Billy was not accepted, in part because the application relied on his seventh grade grades, which had been poor, rather than his significantly better eighth grade grades. Ms. Yanelli had misunderstood a critical element of the selection process. After he was turned down by Henry Vocational School, Billy’s options were limited; he went to Lower Richmond.
Similarly, information about the college admission process that was common knowledge to middle-class families was “shocking” and bewildering to working-class parents like Wendy’s, who had not gone to college themselves (nor had anyone in their immediate families). Wendy’s stepfather, Mack Fallon, appeared to believe that college application fees were refunded if the applicant was not admitted. Also, her mother misunderstood a key communication during a fall trip to Alvernia, a college to which Wendy was later admitted. Ms. Driver had driven her daughter to the campus for a visit and interview, both of which seemed to have gone very welclass="underline"
It was really shocking because of the interview. The person we met with was very nice and looked at her grades and SATs and all that stuff . . . and when we left they said, “Well, we will see you in a couple months for [the] reception.” And we were ecstatic!
Their excitement over Wendy’s apparent acceptance to this college was short-lived, as Ms. Driver explained:
When we left we had to go down to the front desk. And they said, “We’ll be calling you.” And I said, “What do you mean, you’ll be calling me?” [They said,] “Well, we’ll give you a call or a letter to let you know if you’re accepted.” And I’m like, “She’s accepted.” They’re like, “What?!” I said, “They said she was accepted.” They said, “You know that’s not a promise.”
Ms. Driver, a high school graduate working as a secretary, and Wendy had been unaware of the seasonal aspect of the college application process. Nor had Wendy’s school counselor thought to explain to them that students normally apply in the fall and are notified of acceptances and rejections in the spring.41 Wendy’s parents were very enthusiastic about her attending college. Though many of the details escaped them, both parents were very clear on the amount they would have to pay: $1,000 per month. (Ms. Driver was planning to get a second job.) Wendy’s parents depended on the high school counselor (who was quite helpful) and on other professionals throughout the college application process in a way that middle-class parents such as the Tallingers did not. Moreover, her parents’ approach to educational institutions had not changed significantly from when Wendy was in fourth grade. At that time, Ms. Driver had been very concerned that Wendy was still not reading, but she depended on educators to manage the situation. For their part, high school teachers, much like those in elementary school, appeared to expect that Wendy’s parents would take an assertive role in monitoring, managing, and intervening in her school transitions. But it was much harder for working-class and poor parents to comply with this institutional expectation than it was for middle-class parents, because parents’ involvement often was tied to class resources rather than to their love and affection for their children.42
The young adults from working-class and poor families shared their parents’ hazy understanding of college. The youths had hope and ambition, but their knowledge of higher education systems and the pathways through which they might gain additional training and then transition into attractive jobs was imprecise at best. Harold talked about someday “going back to school,” but he did not have a specific school or program in mind. Katie planned to follow up with a friend’s mother who “was talking about medical transcripts.” Though she was unclear about what the job involved or what the wages might be, Katie thought she would “be able to work at a desk and . . . still be paid good.”
In sum, for the working-class and poor families whose life experience had involved moving into the world of work immediately after high school, college was a foreign country. They did not have the middle-class parents’ taken-for-granted experience with higher education in their own lives; nor were they embedded in a social context like that found in suburban school communities, where applying to college was virtually universal. As travelers in foreign lands often discover, it is easy to make simple mistakes.
Interventions
As the youth moved through institutions, they encountered difficulties of various kinds. Some were relatively inconsequential, but others were potentially life changing. Youth sustained injuries and needed surgery, did not like a teacher they had for a course, had unplanned pregnancies, or chose colleges that turned out not to be a good fit. Parents in the study differed in the degree to which they actively supervised their children’s institutional lives. The middle-class parents saw interventions on their children’s behalf as their right and their duty. They were also generally successful in resolving glitches before they derailed the trajectories of their youth. The working-class and poor parents were able to assist with numerous issues in their children’s lives, but in educational institutions and other institutions run by professionals, they expected the professionals to be in charge. In many cases, the institutions expected direct parental involvement, so parents’ decision to leave responsibility for interventions with professionals (or with their adolescent children) was associated with students becoming derailed from a higher education trajectory.
Middle-Class Families: Concerted Cultivation Continues Not only did middle-class parents gather information, but they also actively worked with their sons and daughters, and with the schools, to increase their children’s opportunities. Middle-class parents continued a pattern begun in elementary school. For example, the Williams family undertook a very elaborate college search process. Alexander prepared for the SAT by taking many practice tests, which helped his scores to “[keep] going up”; he also had a private tutor. Mr. Williams took time off from work to accompany Alexander on a spring-break tour of colleges. Ms. Williams also visited colleges with Alexander, and he went on a summertime “college tour,” during which he and “a friend . . . looked at a bunch of schools.” Based on these visits, he worked with his mother to compile a list of colleges to which he would apply. Alexander zeroed in on Columbia and, in consultation with his mother, submitted an early decision application. Other parents also reported large expenditures of time and energy helping their child apply to college.