– While family habitus is not deterministic (there is no straightforward alignment between family habitus, capital, and a child’s science aspirations), social inequalities in the distribution of capital and differentially classed family habitus combine to produce uneven (classed, racialized) patterns in children’s science aspirations and potential future participation.
– Children’s aspirations and views of science careers are formed within families, and these families play an important, albeit complex, role in shaping the boundaries and nature of what children can
conceive of as possible and desirable and the likelihood of their being able to achieve these aspirations.
– Where middle-class family habitus, capital, and a child’s identification with science were in alignment in favor of science, the result was particularly powerful, with families able to foster and capitalize on their child’s interest, enabling them to occupy a strong and privileged position from which to potentially pursue these aspirations further. Science appeared as a ‘‘natural” choice within such families- albeit one that is actively nurtured and resourced.
– Even where middle-class families lacked science-specific capital, they were able to mobilize generic middle-class resources to develop and support their children’s interest in science.
– Within most working-class families, science was less ‘‘familiar,” being more ‘‘peripheral” to parents’ and children’s everyday lives. These families tended not to possess the same quantity and quality
of economic and science-related capital (cultural and social capital) to provide an equivalent basis for supporting the development of children’s science-related aspirations.
– Although some working-class minority ethnic families were able to draw on cultural discourses
(of science as a desirable/appropriate career aspiration) that encouraged and supported science aspirations among children, these aspirations were still circumscribed to some extent by a lack of wider capital.
– The authors suggest that even at the age of 10/11, many working-class children are already disadvantaged and at risk of falling out of the ‘‘leaky pipeline” that leads to a science career, even if they enjoy science.