In contemporary society, interest in education is growing daily, emphasizing its necessary role in our

lives. However, we need to consider a teacher's attitude toward the education that students receive,
especially regarding equitable education. With increasing diversity in our population and cultural
backgrounds, equal levels of education provided are unlikely. Socio-economic status (SES) refers to
the economic status or socioeconomic status of an individual or family. For example, income,
education, level, occupation, and place of residence can be indicated, and this can tell us what role and
position an individual or household belongs to in society. Equitable educational outcomes are defined
as all students having fair access to resources and learning materials in order to succeed. Therefore, it
is to ensure that students have an equitable outcome by considering what education they are receiving
and their circumstances. Understanding the factors that influence Social-economic status (SES) allows
society to further comprehend the impact SES has on students’ educational outcomes. The income of a
family is an example of a SES that plays a significant role in influencing students’ educational
outcomes. According to UNICEF, Australia is in the bottom three of the Organisation for Economic
Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries based on the Program for International Student
Assessment data (PISA) data (Chzhen et al., 2018). This means that students do not produce the same,
high results in the Australian education system and do not receive the same benefits (Noone & Meera
Varadharajan, 2022). Hence, there is a clear disparity in educational outcomes in Australia as a result
of families’ inability to provide resources for their children. Families with high levels of wealth have
more opportunities in education than low SES. For example, wealthy families have easier access to
greater educational materials such as private tutoring (Chesters, 2018).

Many parents are pressured to send their children to private schools because they provide more
diverse activities that affect their children's peer environment (Beazley & Classy, 2023). Furthermore,
school SES plays a significant role in academic achievement which means that school scale and SES
have a positive relationship with students’ performance (Perry et al., 2022).

However, the cost of an independent school is expensive (Melbourne Private School Fees | Primary &
Secondary, 2021).

High SES have significantly more children sent to private schools than low SES (Chairs, 2018). Due
to the limited resources of low SES families, there are higher barriers of entry to sending their
children to private schools, influencing their access to higher educational outcomes.

As a result, the polarization of wealth in the family greatly affects the education their children receive.
Therefore, rich families are bound to be more inclined to achieve a greater sense of achievement in
their education.

Furthermore, according to a survey of data conducted by Chesters (2018), the environment of

families with higher levels of education degree also affects their wealth. For example, families with
higher levels of education have a wealth of approximately $730,690, but families without higher
levels of degree have approximately $335,342. The figures are approximately a twofold difference.
Furthermore, families of parents at higher levels of education were found to be more inclined to send
their children to private schools. According to Chester's theory, the wealth of families can create a
difference in the level of education children receive. Hence, the wealth of families directly determines
a child’s choice of school, influencing the level of educational support and material available.

SES is one of the factors that influence students' participation in education. There are differences in
the degree of participation in other activities apart from studying in school. According to the research
(Mansour et al., 2016), based on different variables in the survey on participation in art activities,
important variables are age, gender, culture, and family environment. In addition, this study proposed
that participating in art activities can further increase students' identity and self-esteem. However, in
addition to activities solely related to art, extracurricular activities can be observed to influence
students’ participation in education. Among the various variables, there are differences depending on
age and gender, however, the family’s environment also affects students’ participation. The data
figures from their research indicate that children with a high SES in the home environment are more
involved in artistic activities (Mansour et al., 2016). This study shows that such high-level social
status or wealthy children have more opportunities to encounter a wider variety of activities.
Therefore, these factors place students in a more advantageous position. Furthermore, the
environment students are in clearly influences their level of education. Differing levels of SES affect
student’s access to extra-curricular activities which plays an important role in improving their
creativity and broadening their perspectives.

Recently, schools have conducted streaming systems that put students in separate groups based on
their outcomes and abilities which leads to the main implication of social inequality. They provide
education in their respective different curriculums. Its purpose is to supply adequate materials to meet
student’s abilities or needs. However, it creates inequitable educational outcomes as low-stream
students have limited learning opportunities (Johnston, 2022). They are limited in their ability to
succeed by receiving a lower-quality education, unlike students in the upper streams. Also, their
abilities are undervalued as teachers do not see them as individuals, but see them as the group's
abilities (Johnston, 2022). These factors may provide a false sense of inadequacy for students in low-
streaming groups, thus building up social inequality. This intensifies SES polarisation, and the
difference becomes a factor that affects education output.

In conclusion, equitable educational achievements vary depending on the SES. The quality of
education students receive depends on the wealth and well-being of their parents/guardians, their
access to educational information through various activities and their social status.

To overcome unfair educational results, we must socially embrace and recognize the problem (Gale et
al., 2017). By providing socially inclusive education, we are able to encourage students to participate
and address their voices in these educational issues (Gale et al., 2017). Additionally, some schools
carry out Flipped classroom education to mitigate the disparity caused by SES (Yough, 2019). This
teaching method requires students to study class materials by themselves before attending the class,
they discuss based on what they have studied and ask questions to teacher which is a way to make
them more involved actively in the class also, they should take responsibility for their own learning
further they are able to study at their own place and if they feel lack acknowledge some parts, they
can understand by re-study content on their won (Yough, 2019). Simulating students’ motivation is the
key point of reducing the unequable educational outcomes. Therefore, this teaching way can be good
solution to reduce unfair educational results. Disparities in education frameworks should be decreased
by supplying opportunities for students to participate in high-quality educational environments.
 References

Beazley, J., & Cassidy, C. (2023, July 17). The parents fleeing Australia’s public school system – and those

choosing to stay. The Guardian; The Guardian.

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2023/jul/18/the-parents-fleeing-australias-public-school-

system-and-those-choosing-to-stay

Chesters, J. (2018). Egalitarian Australia? Associations between family wealth and outcomes in young

adulthood. Journal of Sociology, 55(1), 72–89. https://doi.org/10.1177/1440783318777293

Gale, T., Mills, C., & Cross, R. (2017). Socially Inclusive Teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 68(3),

345–356. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487116685754

Johnston, O. (2022, April 14). “Is this really fair?” How high school students feel about being streamed into

different classes based on “ability.” The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/is-this-really-fair-

how-high-school-students-feel-about-being-streamed-into-different-classes-based-on-ability-180965

Mansour, M., Martin, A. J., Anderson, M., Gibson, R., Arief, G., & Sudmalis, D. (2016). Student, home, and

school socio-demographic factors: links to school, home, and community arts participation. The

Australian Educational Researcher, 43(2), 221–244. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-015-0199-7

Melbourne Private School Fees | Primary & Secondary. (2021). Cluey Learning.

https://clueylearning.com.au/en/school-fees/melbourne-private-school-fees/

Noone, J., & Meera Varadharajan. (2022, February 15). Australia’s education system is one of the most

unequal in the OECD. But we know how to help fix it. The Conversation.
 https://theconversation.com/australias-education-system-is-one-of-the-most-unequal-in-the-oecd-but-

we-know-how-to-help-fix-it-177059

Chzhen, Yekaterina; Gromada, Anna; Rees, Gwyther; Cuesta, Jose; Bruckauf, Zlata (2018). An Unfair Start:

Inequality in Children's Education in Rich Countries, Innocenti Report Card, no. 15, UNICEF Office

of Research - Innocenti, Florence https://www.unicef-irc.org/publications/995-an-unfair-start-

education-inequality-children.html