There are many assumptions regarding the correlation between success rate, social class and the level of intelligence. Locke uses personal experiences to show how her upbringing impacted her level of education, while Lindsey uses statistics to explain the relationship between class and success. Some assume that those who are poor are not smart, when in fact, intelligence isn’t dependent on wealth or social class, but on their culture and way, the individual was raised.
Angela Locke tells a story about how her family used education to rise above the norms of her class to overcome poverty. She faced many obstacles and “did things that poor people aren’t supposed to do” to become successful (Locke, 451). With there being …show more content…
Since working-class parents spend more time working, they are unable to spend as much time with their children as upper-class parents do. Time spent with children is crucial to their success because it helps them develop the drive to be successful. “College-educated professional parents make sure their kids are in college-bound peer groups, while working-class and underclass kids tend to gravitate toward others like them” (Lindsey, 455). Lindsey also provided evidence from a study that reported the impact of social class and education. In this study, “by the time children… were around three years old, the ones from professional families had average vocabularies of 1,116 words; the working-class one’s average 749; the welfare kids, 525” (Lindsey, 455). With this, it shows that wealthier parents typically spend more time developing their children, “which leads to different expectations about future life plans and different self-conceptions in relation to larger society” (Lindsey, 455). If there is no one there pushing them to achieve, they will not be very likely to do