Barton 1

Running head: CLASSISM IN HIGHER EDUCATION

Classism in Higher Education

Janelle Barton
Western Washington University

Barton 2
CLASSISM IN HIGHER EDUCATION
Introduction
In the current economic climate, some form of higher education is a requirement for most
jobs that pay a living wage. For the 50 million Americans living below the poverty line, gaining
access to higher education could be the difference between just getting by and actually making it.
In the documentary, A Place at the Table, single mother of two, Barbie Izquierdo states, My
dream is to go to college. If I go to school, its an investment in my future, but at the same time
Im struggling so much every day to be able to feed my kidsits really hard to make that
decision now (Jacobson & Silverbush, 2012). Unfortunately, many low-income Americans
are having to make similarly impossible decisions about their educational futuressimply
because of their economic status. Faced with myriad challenges in their lives on personal,
communal, societal and cultural levels due to belonging to a lower socio economic status, many
qualified students bypass higher education altogether. While 73% of students from middle and
higher income families will earn a bachelors degree by the time they are 24, only 12% of lowincome students will accomplish the same (Hillman, 2012). Clearly, there is a gap in the
academic attainment of low income students and their higher-income peers, but what is less clear
is how this is happening.
Philosopher Michel Foucault believed that subtly blending into the systems of society are
certain mechanisms and ideas, established over time, that ensure certain groups of individuals
maintain positions of power (Fillingham & Susser, 1993). One of these mechanisms in American
society was the creation of a class system that put individuals into a hierarchy based on social
and monetary capital. Because low-income Americans have the least amount of economic
influence, they have the least amount of say in the standards, policies and ideas set in place by
those in power. In this way, individuals from lower socio-economic statuses have had little

Barton 3
CLASSISM IN HIGHER EDUCATION
influence on the way the American higher educational system has been shaped structured over
time. Therefore, low-income students are not only struggling against a financial disparity, but
must also overcome the classism that exists in internal and external systems surrounding higher
education.
Internal Systems
Admission Barriers
During a time where higher education institutions are becoming more ubiquitous with the
growing popularity of online, technical and community colleges, in addition to existing private
and public universities, competition between these entities is growing. In efforts to distinguish
themselves, educational institutions are continually raising their admission standards by
increasing their academic and extracurricular requirements and offering merit-based rather than
need-based financial aid (The Pell Institute, 2007). In turn, many students from low-income
families who, because of limited finances, do not have access to the same extracurricular
activities and supplementary educational resources as their peers are almost immediately
excluded from more selective institutions (Hillman, 2012). This puts low-income students at an
educational disadvantage because highly selective institutions perform better (Hillman, 2012)
and higher performing schools offer the best levels of attention, student involvement and
academic assistance programs that could allow non-privileged students a greater chance to
succeed (The Pell Institute, 2007). However, the problem remains that even if students from
lower socio-economic statuses can overcome the initial barriers for admission into higherperforming schools, this does not necessarily mean that they will be able afford to attend them.
Rising Costs of Tuition

Barton 4
CLASSISM IN HIGHER EDUCATION
While paying hefty tuition costs is nearly a universal challenge for anybody who pursues
higher education, low-income students are paying the highest price. Even when factors such as
college preparedness and access to financial aid are accounted for, low and moderate income
students choices are growing narrower as the decision to pursue a four year degree continues to
grow costlier. As a 2010 report by the Advisory Committee on Student Financial Assistance
(ACSFA) shows, in 2008, tuition costsminus grant aid from all sourcesrepresented an
average of 48% of a low-income familys income for 4 year universities and 38% for 2 year
colleges. These high educational costs have led to an increase in family concerns about college
expenses and financial aid, which has led to a shift in initial college enrollment away from 4 year
intuitions, resulting in an overall decrease in bachelor degree completion rates among low and
moderate- income students (ACSFA, 2010). This idea that an increase in educational costs leads
to a decrease in degree completion rates highlights the current financial dilemma many low to
moderate income students are facing.
External Systems
Policy Barriers
Even if a students total family income meets the eligibility to receive financial aid, they
have to go through an in-depth application process by filling out and submitting a Free
Application for Federal Student Assistance (FAFSA) by the yearly deadline if they want to
receive any financial assistance on time to pay their tuition. In order to complete the FAFSA, the
filer must have access to official tax records stating their total income, proof of citizenship and
be able to understand the more than 100 questions in-depth about family finances (ACSFA,

Barton 5
CLASSISM IN HIGHER EDUCATION
2010). These requirements could pose significant barriers for individuals that have limited
literacy or do not have access to traditional citizenship or tax records.
Additionally, while educational spending proposals for 2015 seek to increase the amount
of money available for student financial aid, certain measures like modifying pell-grant
eligibility to put additional time limits on degree completion could do more harm than good for
low-income students who need to finish their education at a slower pace (United States
Department of Education (USDE), 2014). Even after the increases to federal spending, the
maximum Pell grant award a student could expect would be $5,830 (USDE, 2014) leaving the
remaining thousands of dollars of educational expenses to state and local governments to handle.
In states where educational funding is a priority, low-income students might receive enough
financial support to complete their degrees if they can meet the aforementioned qualifications to
receive aid. However, with the recent recession many states have resorted to cutting educational
spending leaving many low-income students and their families to fend for themselves.
Cultural Assumptions
While the most obvious disadvantage low-income students face is financial, cultural
assumptions about individuals from lower socio-economic statuses in higher education also have
an impact on students access to selective institutions. These cultural assumptions might take root
in long-held beliefs and practices established by those in power (Fillingham & Susser, 1993), but
they are currently perpetuated by existing social systems like the media. For example, on an
episode of the 2002 hit TV show, Gilmore Girls, working-class mother and daughter main
characters Lorelei and Rory visit Yale University at the request of Loreleis affluent parents.
During the visit, Lorelei confronts her father about his intentions to persuade Rory to go to Yale,

Barton 6
CLASSISM IN HIGHER EDUCATION
to which he responds: This is about Rorys education which, frankly Lorelei, you know
nothing aboutyou never went to college, let alone an Ivy League college; you dont know the
first thing about how the system works (Sherman-Palladino & Robman, 2002).
This example illustrates a cultural belief that working-class individuals dont know how
to navigate systems of higher education and implies that lower-income individuals do not belong
in prestigious educational institutions like Yale. As real-life former presidents of Princeton and
Harvard, William Bowen and Derek Bok, assert: low-income students simply are not well
enough prepared for highly selective sectors of higher education (Hillman, 2012, p. 5). Such a
claim is a testament to the disparity in the representation of low-income students in more
prestigious institutions of higher education: In 2012 only 8-9% of students admitted into highly
selective, prestigious universities came from families earning less than $30,000 per year,
compared to 30% of students attending large, public universities (Hillman). In order for lowincome students to receive the same opportunities as their peers, changes will need to be made to
the existing external and internal systems affecting higher education.
A Possible Solution
For lower-income students educational situation to improve, targeted change must be
initiated at both external and internal systemic levels. For change to occur however, educational
institutions, board members and policy members need to be receptive to it. As the ecological
model affirms, social issues like classism are experienced across intrapersonal, interpersonal,
organizational, environmental and macro-levels (Glanz et. al., 2008). Therefore, a sustainable
and effective solution to this issue would have to address classism in education across various
levels.

Barton 7
CLASSISM IN HIGHER EDUCATION
A possible solution that could achieve this would be establishing a new federal policy that
could initiate change at the macro-level of society, and that could act as a catalyst for progress
towards the desired outcome within each descending level. One such policy that might facilitate
comprehensive change would be the creation of partnerships between high schools, community
colleges and universities located in the same state. The purpose of these partnerships would be to
create educational pathways for lower-income student groups to gain any additional support they
might need to be successful. The policy could also track the graduation numbers of low-income
students within the state and incentivize the institutions showing the best educational attainment
rates through tax-credits or another form of government subsidization. Through giving
educational institutions an incentive to work together in addressing this issue, students from
lower socio-economic statuses can potentially be reached across the organizational, community
and macro-levels of society.
Finally, a way this policy could be implemented effectively could be through taking a
settings approach. Taking a settings approach to the establishment of this new policy would mean
that the promotion of educational attainment for low-income students would be incorporated into
each level of the organizations involved (Glanz et. al., 2008). In order to accomplish this,
legislators, administrators, educators, students, families and community members who are
involved with or occupy educational organizations must be united in working towards the
policys goal. In this way, the new policy could be understood and implemented by the
individuals within the educational settings that low-income students interact with, and ideally,
this could bolster the overall effectiveness of the program.

Barton 8
CLASSISM IN HIGHER EDUCATION
Conclusion
If the higher educational system remains as it is, large numbers of low-income students
will continue to be excluded from it. While the classism that affects students from lower socioeconomic statuses is subtle, it presents a network of internal and external systemic barriers that
keep the price for pursuing a college education especially high. In order to lower these financial,
social, and personal costs and enable low-income students to have the same academic
opportunities as their peers, solutions need to be developed that can be focused in their purpose
and span the various levels of society.

Barton 9
CLASSISM IN HIGHER EDUCATION
References
Advisory Committee on Student Financial Assistance. (2010). The rising price of inequality: How
inadequate grant aid limits college access and persistence. Retrieved from:
https://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/acsfa/rpijunea.pdf

Fillingham, L. A., & Susser, M. (1993).Foucault for Beginners. London: Writers & Readers
Publishing.
Glanz, K., Rimmer B.K. & Viswanath, K. (2008). Health behavior and health education:
Theory, research, and practice.
Hillman, N. (2012). Economic diversity among selective colleges: Measuring the enrollment
impact of no-loan programs. Retrieved from:
http://www.ihep.org/sites/default/files/uploads/docs/pubs/brief_economic_diversity_amo
ng_selective_colleges_august_2012.pdf
Jacobson, K., & Silverbush, L. (directors). (2012). A place at the table [Documentary]. United
States: Magnolia Pictures.
The Pell Institute (2007). Demography is not destiny: Increasing the graduation rates of lowincome college students at large public universities. Washington, DC: Engle, J., &
OBrien, J. Retrieved from: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED497044.pdf
Sherman-Palladino, A. (Writer), & Robman, R. (Director). (2002). Let the games begin
[Television series episode]. In A. Sherman-Palladino (Producer), Gilmore Girls. Burbank,
California: Time Warner.

Barton 10
CLASSISM IN HIGHER EDUCATION
United States Department of Education. Student aid overview: Fiscal year 2015 budget request.
Retreived from: http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/budget15/justifications/psaoverview.pdf