The plight of the “squeezed middle” – those on low and middle incomes who have been particularly hit by stagnant wages, rising prices and public spending cuts – was high on the agenda of the media and politicians last year. New research indicates, moreover, that this recent phenomenon may be set to have far-reaching consequences.

The ability of children to start school ready and able to learn can have a long-term impact on how successful they are in education and employment. Indeed, the fact that children from the poorest backgrounds are already falling behind their more affluent peers when they start school has been well documented.

But a new analysis of a cohort of 15,000 children born in 2000 finds that, when they arrive at school, children from low-to-middle income families are “five months behind children from higher-income families in terms of vocabulary skills – an important measure of cognitive development – and exhibit more behaviour problems.”

This conclusion comes from a new analysis of data from the UK Millennium Cohort Study by Elizabeth Washbrook and Jane Waldfogel for The Resolution Foundation. They defined low-to-middle income households as being in the bottom 10-50 per cent of the income distribution and not receiving any major means-tested benefit. Higher-income families were defined as having above median incomes but no state benefits.

Children’s vocabulary was measured using the British Ability Scales (BAS) Naming Vocabulary test, while the Total Problems score from the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire was used to measure behavior problems.

In trying to explain the gap in vocabulary and behavior, Washbrook and Waldfogel note that “the characteristics of low-to-middle income families and higher-income families are not all that dissimilar and these families do not face many of the risk issues that characterize the poorest families. But important differences exist in relation to parental education and parental income.”

For example, over one-third (36 per cent) of low-to-middle income parents have no formal qualifications beyond GCSE compared with 12 per cent of parents in high-earner families. They are also less than half as likely – by 30 per cent compared with 67 per cent – to have a degree than higher-income parents. Average levels of household income, adjusted for household size, are more than twice as high in the higher-income group.

As for how these differences affect children’s development, Waldfogel and Washbrook find that “nearly half the gap in vocabulary between the two groups, and over three-quarters of the gap in behavior, can be explained by measurable aspects of the environments in which children are raised, including how they are parented, the health and well-being of their parents and the educational opportunities they enjoy in the home. The remainder of the gaps is explained by other environmental factors associated with income, parental education and other background factors such as mother’s age at childbirth.”

The fact that children from low-to-middle income families have fewer opportunities to learn at home than higher-income children is the most significant environmental factor in explaining the developmental gap in vocabulary. The most significant environmental factor in explaining the gap in behaviour is the poorer mental well-being and greater social isolation of mothers in low-to-middle income families.

The authors conclude: “A large part of the influence of parental education and income feeds through these environmental factors. With parents on low-to-middle incomes being increasingly squeezed in terms of time and money as wages continue to stagnate and the cost of living rises, there is a risk that greater parental stress will translate into less positive environments for their children.”

They also warn that while “narrowly focused targeting at parents who are struggling to provide the basic necessities for their children is understandable when government resources are scarce,” it may also prove “short-sighted.” Indeed, the authors suggest that “without attention, the future skills and economic productivity of today’s children from low-to-middle income working families – a third of all children in this cohort – will not be as high as they potentially could be. Families who are just above the threshold to receive government services may benefit greatly from relatively modest levels of support, closing the school readiness gap between their children and those of higher income families.”

**********
Reference:
Washbrook, E. and Waldfogel, J. (2011) On Your Marks: Measuring the School Readiness of Children in Low-to-Middle Income Families. London: Resolution Foundation.