When Schools Reward Social Class Instead of Merit 

Published on: Augsut 30, 2026

In the context of Bangladesh, education is frequently idealized as the ultimate great equalizer, a gateway that promises upward social mobility regardless of one's background. Quantitative milestones often support this narrative of progress. However, beneath these celebratory access metrics lies a starkly unequal reality. A critical examination of the current educational landscape suggests that the system often unintentionally reproduces the very social inequalities it seeks to diminish. While policy discourse often focuses on access, the number of students in classrooms, it frequently overlooks the subtle systemic processes that dictate whose knowledge is valued more.

Social Reproduction Theory offers an analytical lens for examining the disparities between various socioeconomic groups, specifically focusing on the distinctions between upper, middle, and working or lower classes. It acts as a sociological and educational framework that examines the mechanisms by which societal inequalities are sustained and passed down over time through educational institutions. Pierre Bourdieu stated that three forms of capital reproduce inequalities in society: economic, cultural, and social capital. Economic capital entails traditional financial resources, such as money, property, and assets. Cultural capital encompasses knowledge, skills, education, and cultural experiences. Social capital encompasses an individual's network of social relationships and associations, spanning family members, friends, professional colleagues, and wider acquaintances. Schools do not merely reward academic mastery; they privilege specific ways of speaking, interacting, and behaving. This demonstrates how the structure of the education system is inherently configured to institutionalize inequality. Consequently, students who arrive with these interactional styles are often perceived as more competent, while those from marginalized or working-class backgrounds are frequently penalized for their deviation from these dominant norms.

Despite numerous government initiatives and academic efforts aimed at narrowing the divide between privileged and working-class populations, research consistently indicates a widening gap between elite and working-class children. This persistent disparity highlights how traditional policy interventions often fail to address the deeper structural mechanisms embedded within schooling. Consequently, educational institutions continue to act as sorting mechanisms that widen societal inequalities.

According to a report up to 2025 by the Bangladesh Bureau of Educational Information and Statistics (BANBEIS), out of 21,086 secondary schools across the country, 19,757 are privately managed, representing roughly 93.7 percent of all institutions. These institutions are frequently perceived to offer superior educational experiences, characterized by modern infrastructure, comprehensive facilities, and highly qualified instructors. Consequently, many parents associate private schooling with a higher standard of learning. Because private schooling often requires significant financial investment, it is primarily accessible to wealthier households. This commercialization of schooling turns a public good into a stratified market, where a household's economic capital dictates access to quality instruction. Despite advancements in schooling, persistent inequalities remain, with households from higher socioeconomic backgrounds consistently securing better educational outcomes than those from marginalized groups.

This perception is further complicated by a stark divide in educational quality between urban and rural communities. Besides economic constraints, factors such as social status, gender, and the quality of schooling provided are critical barriers that prevent marginalized populations from achieving educational outcomes. Consequently, children from low-income households and marginalized areas are frequently denied access to high-quality education and the accompanying professional opportunities, effectively trapping them in an unbreakable cycle of poverty.

According to multiple researchers, the education system functions as a mechanism to transmit cultural capital across generations, thereby concealing the underlying mechanisms of social exclusion. The system functions to validate the cultural capital of dominant social groups while simultaneously devaluing the cultural backgrounds of students from lower-class origins. Although marginalized communities possess rich social networks and distinct cultural experiences, these assets are largely dismissed by the formal education system. Instead of recognizing and building upon these forms of capital, schools prioritize only the values and connections held by the dominant class, effectively rendering the backgrounds of lower-income students invisible.

In Bangladesh, this could specifically refer to the distinction between standard Bengali (Cholito bhasha) used in formal schooling and the local dialects (Ancholik bhasha) spoken in villages or indigenous regions. Teachers often conflate a student's possession of middle-class cultural codes with genuine academic brilliance, which explains why students from marginalized backgrounds are frequently misidentified as lacking ability. The formal curriculum is often overshadowed by a ‘hidden curriculum’. The hidden curriculum includes knowledge of how to act in a classroom, how to ask a question, or how to debate a topic. When schools prioritize these behaviors, they are testing a student's social upbringing instead of their intelligence. Again, many schools require parents to have navigational and communicational skills, such as knowing how to talk to teachers, how to handle school admissions paperwork, or how to advocate for their child. Though affluent parents do this naturally, marginalized parents are often intimidated by the system, and their children suffer the consequences. This disparity in parental involvement is not merely a personal choice but is heavily influenced by systemic socioeconomic factors. All these fundamentally support the claim that the school system is designed in a manner that fosters inequality within the education system.

Addressing these systemic inequalities requires moving beyond mere policy obsessions with enrollment numbers and physical infrastructure. True educational reform demands a critical pedagogical shift; one that actively validates alternative linguistic capitals, bridges the resource gaps exposed by socioeconomic disparities, and dismantles the hidden curricula that marginalize vulnerable learners. To bring this about, educational policy and classroom practice must undergo a fundamental transformation across three key dimensions.

Educators must create inclusive spaces where students feel secure using their authentic voices, ensuring that linguistic differences are treated as cultural assets rather than barriers to academic success. Policymakers must move towards ensuring equitable distribution of digital tools, high-quality learning materials, and subsidized academic support. By leveling the field, schools can prevent financial privilege from dictating academic outcomes. Transforming the hidden curriculum means making institutional expectations transparent, training educators to recognize their own implicit biases, and redesigning curricula to reflect the diverse realities of all students rather than just the socioeconomic elite.

Until the educational system confronts these embedded mechanisms of exclusion, it will continue to sustain the very societal hierarchies it is meant to dismantle, locking marginalized youth into cycles of structural disadvantage rather than enabling true social mobility.