, Volume 47, Issue 2, pp 189–210 | Cite as

Parentocracy Revisited: Still a Relevant Concept for Understanding Middle Class Educational Advantage?



In this paper, we revisit Brown’s (Br J Soc Educ 14: 65–85, 1990) concept of parentocracy which has been informatively applied in educational research in a number of studies in various countries internationally—but almost none in North America. We provide an expanded conceptualization of parentocracy and suggest that it provides a useful encapsulation of a number of similar, and/or complementary, conceptual approaches to understanding middle class educational advantage. Our expanded conceptualization of parentocracy stems from Brown’s (Br J Soc Educ 14: 65–85, 1990) original use, but encompasses both a socio-political ideology that favors parental sovereignty and market solutions in education, as well as a proactive interventionist parenting style premised on fostering child development (and strategically optimizing life opportunities) through structured, progressive skill-enhancing educational and extra-curricular experiences. We offer a discussion of a number of studies that can be seen to exemplify, either expressly or implicitly, these parentocratic tendencies. Finally, using the examples of Schools of Choice policy and French immersion schools in the Canadian province of Manitoba, we explore the implications of parentocratic practices for educational inequality and social reproduction in the 2010s.


Parentocracy Educational inequality Social reproduction Educational policy School choice French immersion Parental capital 



The authors declare that they received no funding for the present article.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. Ball, S. (1993). Education markets, choice and social class: The market as a class strategy in the UK and the US. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 14(1), 3–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ball, S. (2006). Education policy and social class: The selected works of Stephen J. Ball. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Barton, L. (1995). The politics of education for all. Support for Learning, 10(4), 156–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bastiani, J. (1993). Parents as partners: Genuine progress or empty rhetoric? In P. Munn (Ed.), Parents and schools: Customers, mangers or partners (pp. 101–116). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. Blackmore, J., & Hutchison, K. (2010). Ambivalent relations: The ‘tricky footwork’ of parental involvement in school communities. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 14(5), 499–515. doi: 10.1080/13603110802657685.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bosetti, L. (2005). School choice: Public education at a crossroad. American Journal of Education: School Choice, 111(4), 435–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bosetti, L., & Pyryt, M. (2007). Parental motivation in school choice. Journal of School Choice: International Research and Reform, 1(4), 89–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bourdieu, P. (1974). School as a conservative force: scholastic and cultural inequalities. In J. Eggleston (Ed.), Contemporary research in the sociology of education (pp. 32–46). London: Methuen.Google Scholar
  9. Bourdieu, P. (1997). The forms of capital. (R. Nice, Trans.). In A. Halsey, H. Lauder, P. Brown, & A. Stuart Wells (Eds.), Education: Culture, economy, society (pp. 46–58). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. (Reprinted from Handbook of theory of research for the sociology of education, pp. 241–258, by J. Richardson, Ed., 1986, Westport, CT: Greenword Press).Google Scholar
  10. Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J.-C. (1990). Reproduction in education, society and culture (2nd ed.). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Brown, P. (1990). The ‘third wave’: Education and the ideology of parentocracy. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 11(1), 65–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brown, P. (1995). Cultural capital and social exclusion: Some observations on recent trends in education, employment and the labour market. Work, Employment & Society, 9(1), 29–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Brown, P. (2000). The globalisation of positional competition? Sociology, 34(4), 633–653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Canadian Council on Learning (CCL). (2007). 2007 Survey of Canadian attitudes toward learning: Results for elementary and secondary school learning. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Council on Learning. Retrieved from
  15. Chen, H. (2013). Micro-political analysis of the principal selection in a Taiwanese elementary school. Educational Research and Reviews, 8(21), 2007–2010.Google Scholar
  16. Coffey, A. (2001). Education and social change. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  17. Coleman, J. (1997). Social capital in the creation of human capital. In A. Halsey, H. Lauder, P. Brown, & A. Stuart Wells (Eds.), Education: Culture, economy, society (pp. 80–95). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. (Reprinted from American Journal of Sociology, pp. S95–S120, 94, Supplement 1988).Google Scholar
  18. Comer, J., & Haynes, N. (1991). Parental involvement in schools: An ecological approach. Elementary School Journal: Special Issue: Educational Partnerships: Home-School Community, 91(3), 271–277.Google Scholar
  19. Conway, S. (1997). The reproduction of exclusion and disadvantage: Symbolic violence and social class inequalities in ‘parental choice’ of secondary education. Sociological Research Online, 2(4). Retrieved from
  20. Crozier, G. (1999). Parental involvement: Who wants it? International Studies in Sociology of Education, 9(3), 219–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. David, M. (1993). Parents, gender and educational reform. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  22. David, M. (1995). Parental wishes versus parental choice. History of Education, 24(3), 267–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. David, M., West, A., & Ribbens, J. (1994). Mother’s intuition? Choosing secondary schools. London, UK: Falmer.Google Scholar
  24. Davies, S. (2004). School choice by default? Understanding the demand for private tutoring in Canada. American Journal of Education, 110(3), 233–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Davies, S., Aurini, J., & Quirke, L. (2002). New markets for private education in Canada. Education Canada, 42(4), 36–38.Google Scholar
  26. Dehli, K. (2009). ‘Race’, ‘parents’, and education policy discourse in Ontario. In C. Levine-Rasky (Ed.), Canadian perspectives on the sociology of education (pp. 323–337). Don Mills, ON: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Demerath, P. (2009). Producing success. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Dom, L., & Verhoeven, J. (2006). Partnership and conflict between parents and schools: How are schools reacting to the new participation law in Flanders (Belgium)? Journal of Education Policy, 21(5), 567–597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Donahoo, S. (2009). Further deferring the dream: How privileged parents prevent the effectiveness of affirmative action. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the 53rd Annual Conference of the Comparative and International Education Society, Charleston, SC. Retrieved from
  30. Eckler, R. (2015, April 12). The new tutor dynasty. Maclean’s. Retrieved from
  31. Epstein, J. (1983). Longitudinal effects of family–school–person interactions on student outcomes. Research in Sociology of Education and Socialization, 4, 101–127.Google Scholar
  32. Epstein, J. (2005). Attainable goals? The spirit and letter of the No Child Left Behind Act on parent involvement. Sociology of Education, 78(2), 179–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Evans, M. (2014). Soccer Moms UNITE! Affluent families and the utilization of grassroots strategies for education reform. Interchange, 45(1–2), 85–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Fine, M. (1997). [Ap]parent involvement: Reflections on parents, power, and urban public schools. In A. Halsey, H. Lauder, P. Brown, & A. Stuart Wells (Eds.), Education: Culture, economy, society (pp. 460–475). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. (Reprinted from Teachers College Record, pp. 682–710, 94, 1993).Google Scholar
  35. Fujita, H. (2010). Whither Japanese schooling? Educational reforms and their impact on ability formation and educational opportunity. In J. Gordon (Ed.), Challenges to Japanese education: Economics and human rights (pp. 17–53). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  36. Government of Canada. (1982). Canadian charter of rights and freedoms. Retrieved from
  37. Hardin, G. (1999). The tragedy of the commons. In Mark J. Smith (Ed.), Thinking through the environment: A reader (pp. 251–259). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  38. Herman, J., & Yeh, J. (1983). Some effects of parent involvement in schools. The Urban Review, 15(1), 11–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Hess, R., & Holloway, S. (1984). Family and school as educational institutions. In R. Parke (Ed.), Review of child development research (Vol. 7, pp. 179–222)., The family Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  40. Hoover-Dempsey, K., & Sandler, H. (1997). Why do parents become involved in their children’s education? Review of Educational Research, 67(3), 3–42. doi: 10.3102/00346543067001003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Hutchins, A. (2015). Just say ‘non’: The problem with French immersion. Maclean’s, 128(12), 16–20. Retrieved from
  42. Kachur, J. (1999). Privatizing public choice: The rise of charter schooling in Alberta. In T. Harrison & J. Kachur (Eds.), Contested classrooms: Education, globalization and democracy in Alberta (pp. 107–122). Edmonton, AB: University of Alberta Press.Google Scholar
  43. Lareau, A. (1987). Social class differences in family-school relationships: The importance of cultural capital. Sociology of Education, 60(2), 73–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Lareau, A. (2000). Home advantage: Social class and parental intervention in elementary education. New York, NY: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  45. Lareau, A. (2011). Unequal childhoods: Class, race and family life (2nd ed.). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  46. Lareau, A., & Cox, A. (2011). Social class and the transition to adulthood: Differences in parents’ interactions with institutions. In M. Carlson & P. England (Eds.), Social class and changing families in an unequal America (pp. 134–164). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Lareau, A., & McNamara Horvat, E. (1999). Moments of social inclusion and exclusion: Race, class, and cultural capital in family-school relationships. Sociology of Education, 72(1), 37–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Lareau, A., & Munoz, V. (2012). “You’re not going to call the shots”: Structural conflicts between the principal and the PTO at a suburban public elementary school. Sociology of Education, 85(3), 201–218. doi: 10.1177/0038040711435855.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Lareau, A., & Shumar, W. (1996). The problem of individualism in family-school policies. Sociology of Education: Extra Issue: Special Issue on Sociology and Educational Policy: Bringing Scholarship and Practice Together, 69, 24–39.Google Scholar
  50. Lareau, A., & Weininger, E. (2008). Class and the transition to adulthood. In A. Lareau & D. Conley (Eds.), Social class: How does it work? (pp. 118–151). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  51. Madzanire, D., & Mashava, R. (2012). Dangerous schools and the rise of parentocracy. Journal of Sociological Research, 3(2), 414–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Makropoulos, J. (2009). Gaining access to late French-immersion programs: Class-based perspectives of Canadian students in an Ottawa high school. Bilingual Research Journal: The Journal of the National Association for Bilingual Education, 32(3), 317–330. doi: 10.1090/152358809003378941.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Manitoba Education. (2014). Schools in Manitoba: Schools of choice. Retrieved from
  54. Martin, N. (2014, November 17). WSD chairman spurns idea of school swap: French program running our of program space. Winnipeg Free Press. Retrieved from
  55. Martin, N. (2015, June 29). French-language education needs prompt action: St. James-Assiniboia eyes more changes. Winnipeg Free Press. Retrieved from
  56. Mattingly, D., Prislin, R., McKenzie, T., Rodriguez, J., & Kayzar, B. (2002). Evaluating evaluations: The case of parent involvement in programs. Review of Educational Research, 72(4), 549–576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. McNamara Horvat, E., Weininger, E., & Lareau, A. (2003). From social ties to social capital: Class differences in the relations between schools and parent networks. American Educational Research Journal, 40(2), 319–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Okuma-Nyström, M. K. (2005). Limited freedom of choice: Cases of high schools in Stockholm and Tokyo. Education and Society, 28(1), 57–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Ong, A. (2014, Mar. 30). Beware growing ‘parentocracy’: NIE don. The Sunday Times. Retrieved from
  60. Paquette, J. (2005). Public funding for “private” education: The equity challenge of enhanced choice. American Journal of Education: School choice, 111(4), 568–595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Poikolainen, J. (2012). A case study of parents’ school choice strategies in a Finnish urban context. European Educational Research Journal, 11(1), 127–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Power, S., & Whitty, G. (2006). Education and the middle class: A complex but crucial case for the sociology of education. In H. Lauder, P. Brown, J. Dillabough, & A. Halsey (Eds.), Education, globalization and social change (pp. 446–453). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  63. Smala, S., Paz, J., & Lingard, B. (2013). Languages, cultural capital and school choice: Distinction and second-language immersion programmes. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 34(3), 373–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Swedberg, R. (2001). Sociology and game theory: Contemporary and historical perspectives. Theory and Society, 30(3), 301–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Tett, L., & Crowther, J. (1998). Families at a disadvantage: Class, culture and literacies. British Educational Research Journal, 24(4), 449–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Troman, G. (2000). Teacher stress in the low-trust society. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 21(3), 331–353. doi: 10.1080/713655357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Turner, R. (1960). Sponsored and contest ability and the school system. American Sociological Review, 25(6), 855–867.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. van Zanten, A. (2005). New modes of reproducing social inequality in education: the changing roles of parents, teachers, schools and educational policies. European Educational Research Journal, 4(3), 155–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. van Zanten, A., & Darchy-Koechlin, B. (2005). Parentocracie et marché contre méritocratie. Le Monde de l’éducation, 340, 18–19.Google Scholar
  70. Warrington, M. (2005). Mirage in the desert? Access to educational opportunities in an area of social exclusion. Antipode, 37(4), 796–816.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Weber, M. (1978). Economy and society: An outline of interpretive sociology. G. Roth & C. Wittich (Eds.). Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press (Original work published in 1956).Google Scholar
  72. Weininger, E., & Lareau, A. (2003). Translating Bourdieu into the American context: the question of social class and family-school relations. Poetics, 31(5–6), 375–402. doi: 10.1016/S0304-422X(03)00034-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Weis, L., & Cipollone, A. (2013). ‘Class work’: Producing privilege and social mobility in elite US secondary schools. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 34(5–6), 701–722. doi: 10.1080/01425692.2013.816037.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. West, A., David, M., Hailes, J., & Ribbens, J. (1995). Parents and the process for choosing secondary schools: Implications for schools. Educational Management, Administration and Leadership, 23(1), 28–38. doi: 10.1177/174114329502300104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Windle, J. (2009). The limits of school choice: some implications for accountability of selective practices and positional competition in Australian education. Critical Studies in Education, 50(3), 231–246. doi: 10.1080/17508480903009566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Wrigley, J. (2000). Foreword. In A. Lareau (Ed.), Home advantage: Social class and parental intervention in elementary education (pp. viii–xvi). New York, NY: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  77. Yamashita, J. & Ohmori, A. (2009). Assessing the evidence of school choice: A case study of Japan using a statistical model. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the 53rd Annual Conference of the Comparative and International Education Society, Charleston, SC. Retrieved from

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Corinne E. Barrett DeWiele
    • 1
  • Jason D. Edgerton
    • 2
  1. 1.Faculté d’éducationUniversité de Saint-BonifaceWinnipegCanada
  2. 2.Department of SociologyUniversity of ManitobaWinnipegCanada

Personalised recommendations