Not wanting to class or be classed: Student teachers in Ireland from working class backgrounds reflecting on class and class categorisations

Abstract

This article is about the perspectives of student teachers from working class backgrounds in Ireland about social class. In the context of drives to diversify the teaching profession internationally, examining how those from under-represented groups understand their identities assumes great importance. Employing constructivist grounded theory, 31 interviews were conducted with 21 student teachers from working class backgrounds exploring their perspectives on social class. While participants were clear that class ‘existed’ and remained highly relevant in Irish society, they emphasised silence about class in Ireland, except through forms of euphemising. Despite describing themselves in classed terms, most were critical of class categorisations believing they involved looking down on someone or being looked down on, resulting in feelings of shame and unworthiness. The findings are discussed relative to previous scholarship regarding silences about social class in Irish policy and cultural sociological theories of (class) disidentification.

Introduction

This article examines the perspectives of a group of student teachers from working class backgrounds in Ireland about issues of social class positionality and categorisation, including their own. Whilst social class in education has been extensively examined in research, it has received relatively scant attention in relation to the teaching profession, being largely ‘invisible’ (Hall and Jones, 2013; Reay, 1998, Van Galen, 2008). This is somewhat surprising, given that while teaching has traditionally been regarded as a predominantly middle class profession (Lampert et al. 2016), it has also been viewed as one that facilitates upward mobility for those from working class backgrounds (Coolahan, 2003). Notwithstanding, research in the area has been increasing, with scholars from the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, and Ireland reporting upon the experiences of student teachers and teachers from various class backgrounds, building upon the seminal work of Maguire in England in the 2000s. An aspect that remains under-explored relates to the perspectives of those from different class backgrounds about the construct of social class itself. We know little about how student teachers think about issues of social class, class categorisations, and how their own positionality fits therein. While class conceptualisations are ‘fuzzy’ (Ball, 2003: 11) and contested, the heralded ‘demise’ of social class in the 1980s and 1990s has been disputed by leading scholars who have argued that its importance has only increased over time. Indeed, Skeggs (2005: 969) has insisted that ‘class is so insinuated in the intimate making of self and culture that it is even more ubiquitous than previously articulated, if more difficult to pin down, leaking beyond the traditional measures of classification’. Indeed, as part of the ‘cultural turn’ in research about social class (cf. Devine, 2004; Devine et al., 2004), Savage (2003) highlighted what he termed a ‘new class paradigm’ that emphasises understandings of class in more relational terms and examines class identities and practices (cf. Savage, 2003) including psychosocial and emotional aspects in explicating issues of social mobility and related perceptions. In this context, the work of Reay (1998), Lucey et al. (2003), Savage et al. (2001), and Skeggs (2004) is relevant, as well as more recent contributions from Loveday (2014) and Friedman et al. (2021), particularly expressed ambivalence about personal social class location (see the literature review section).

Concerns about the relative homogeneity of the teaching profession, in terms of it being predominantly white, female, and middle class, have been voiced internationally for some time, and efforts to diversify the profession have received attention on policy, practice and research levels (Schleicher, 2014). In Ireland, the focus on the homogeneity of the teaching profession was heightened by the significant diversification of the general Irish and schooling populations in the 2000s, resulting in a notable ‘diversity gap’ between student and teaching bodies (Keane and Heinz, 2015). In response to research demonstrating the stark under-representation in teaching of certain groups, including those from minority ethnic and working class backgrounds, as well as those with disabilities (Darmody and Smyth, 2016; Heinz and Keane, 2018; Keane and Heinz, 2015, 2016; Keane et al., 2018a), in 2017, the Higher Education Authority (HEA) launched the innovative national Programme for Access to Higher Education (PATH): Strand 1 (Equity of Access to Initial Teacher Education) (PATH1). This initiative, through which €5.4 million was invested since 2017, established a range of teacher diversity projects run through the Centres for Teacher Education. While these projects focus on dimensions of diversity in accordance with target groups defined in the National Access Plan (HEA, 2022), several support the participation in teaching of those from working class backgrounds (cf. Keane et al., 2023c). Teacher diversity remains a policy priority (DE, 2023; HEA, 2022), underscoring the importance of researching the perspectives and experiences of those from under-represented groups regarding access to the teaching profession.

This article draws upon data collected as part of the Access to Post-primary Teaching (APT) teacher diversity project at the University of Galway which supports the participation of those from working class backgrounds in/to initial teacher education (ITE) through the provision of varied supports. To be included in APT, participants were required to have entered their undergraduate degree via a pre-entry access programme, or the Higher Education Access Route (HEAR ¹ ), both of which necessitate meeting certain socio-economic criteria relating to family income (see the methodology section for more information). Drawing on a constructivist grounded theory study exploring the social class identities and experiences of 21 student teachers from working class backgrounds, this article examines participants’ perspectives about issues of social class positionality and categorisation.

Literature review

While research about social class and related identities suggests that people can be ambivalent about their personal social class positioning, it also has demonstrated that people nonetheless do not subscribe to the idea that society is either ‘classless’ or that class-related inequalities are declining (cf. Savage et al., 2001; Skeggs, 2004). Indeed, research suggests that most people ‘… recognise, sometimes grudgingly, that it [class] exists “out there”’ (Savage et al., 2001: 882). Ambivalence about personal class identities is commonly reported. The young white working class women in Skeggs’ (1997) study considered themselves misrecognised and pathologised by the middle class as valueless. They did not wish to be identified as working class as this meant being labelled as ‘feckless, fecund and hypersexual’ (Skeggs, 2011: 504). The women spent a lot of time defending themselves against such narratives and seeking to establish value for themselves. With working class identity becoming increasingly pathologised as valueless over time (Blackman, 1996; Lawler, 2005; Loveday, 2014; Reay, 2005; Skeggs, 2004), it is understandable that these women wanted to avoid being misrecognised in this way. Evidence for Skeggs’ (1997) ‘disidentification thesis’ – not identifying with class groups on a personal level – has also been found elsewhere. Savage et al. (2001) examined ‘the ambivalent nature of contemporary class identities’ (p. 875), finding that while people generally name class as a social and political issue and are cognisant of class inequalities ‘out there’ (p. 880), they hesitate to position themselves in class terms. Reay (2005: 923) has argued that ‘Class may be out there but individuals seem to believe it does not touch them personally … there is often a staunch denial of class thinking and feeling, especially one's own …’. Savage et al. (2001) found that most of their participants (from various class backgrounds) wished to establish themselves as ‘ordinary’, understood as a ‘defensive device to avoid the politics of being labelled in class terms’ (p. 875). They argue that ‘invoking ordinariness is a strategy that people can draw on to try to evade social fixing’ (p. 889). In relation to those from middle class backgrounds who desire to be seen as ‘ordinary’, Skeggs (2005) argues that there may be a desire to avoid being seen as ‘pretentious’, given the ‘ubiquitous critique of pretensions in Europe’ (p. 976). She sees the desire to not be seen as pretentious as evidence of ‘awareness of, and a way of evading, hierarchy and privilege in relationship to others’ (p. 976).

Contextual differences matter. As Friedman et al. (2021) observe, while most people in Europe and the United States position themselves as middle class (irrespective of their ‘objective’ class positioning), Britain constitutes an outlier with people there ‘more likely to “misidentify” as working class rather than middle class’ (p. 3). In this regard, Sayer (2002) has shown that people in the United Kingdom tend to reject the term ‘middle class’ as they associate it with privilege. This work suggests that while people are eager to be recognised as having value, they are, nonetheless, conscious about not being seen as having privilege. Indeed, Sayer (2002) explores the ‘embarrassment’ of class with relevant individuals recognising and wishing to deny their privileged positioning. Misidentification may be ‘rooted in a desire to resist moral assumptions associated with certain class destinations’ (Friedman et al., 2021: 719) given that in Britain identifying as middle class can be seen as pretentious or as ‘seeing oneself as above others’ (ibid). While misidentifications as working class can be due to people drawing on extended (past) family histories through ‘the intergenerational self’, it also acts as way to deflect and obscure class privilege (Friedman et al., 2021). Class identities in Ireland are even more complex. Certainly, social class is more silent and denied (Keane, 2009) in Ireland than in the United Kingdom; indeed, Muntaner et al. (2001) argue that it is a taboo and hidden subject. As a post-colonial Republic, class, and related demarcations, are perceived in public consciousness as ‘…a typically English phenomenon … left behind with the ending of landlordism and the demise of the Anglo-Irish ascendancy’ (Breen and Whelan, 1996: 1). While ‘class boundaries are less ritualized in Ireland’, Breen and Whelan argue that class-related barriers – for example, in terms of the impact on people's life chances relative to health and resources – are ‘substantially more rigid than in other countries’ (p. 1).

The real power of class is seen in how difficult people find it to speak about (Bourdieu, 1984; Skeggs, 1997). Avoiding personal class categorisations is understandable if we accept that ‘to confront class … threatens people's fragile sense of self-dignity and self-respect…’ (Savage et al., 2001: 877), perhaps because of their understanding on some level that ‘class is not an innocent descriptive term but is a loaded moral signifier’ (p. 889). Acceding to the notion of class on a personal level may result in a person feeling powerless because they are seen ‘as the product of their social background’ (ibid., p. 882). Indeed, Sayer (2002) explains the ‘embarrassment’ of the class by pointing to people's awareness of its ‘morally problematic nature’ and ‘associations of injustice and moral evaluation’ (1.4). Questions about one's class positioning are ‘unsettling’, Sayer argues, because they draw on discourses of worth and evaluation: ‘… like it or not, class raises issues of the relative worth of individuals, and about differences between how people are valued economically, and how they are valued ethically’ (1.2). Drawing on Sayer's (2005) arguments, Loveday (2014: 724) argues that it is unsurprising that ‘many working-class people are reluctant to position themselves in class-based terms … that many will actively choose to disidentify from such valueless subject positions’.

As observed by Maguire (2005b: 428), there was a ‘sidelining’ of issues of class inequality in the teaching profession in the past. Building on the important work in the United Kingdom by Burn (2001) and Maguire (1999, 2001, 2005a, 2005b), a significant body of work has more recently emerged, in Australia (Lampert et al., 2016), the United Kingdom (Hall and Jones, 2013; Jones, 2019), the United States (Van Galen, 2004, 2008, 2010), and Ireland (Keane, 2023, 2024; Keane et al., 2018b, 2023a, 2023b). This research has focused on student teachers’ and teachers’ motivations for and orientations to teaching, with findings suggesting that those from working class backgrounds are more likely than their middle class counterparts to voice altruistic motivations for teaching (cf. Burn, 2001; Maguire, 1999, 2001, 2005a; Van Galen, 2008) and to emphasise the importance of being inclusive and relatable teachers (Keane et al., 2018b; 2023a). Research also points to the concerns of these teachers about belonging and fitting in, particularly in certain school contexts, with participants being hyperconscious about class markers (cf. Burn 2001; Jones, 2019; Keane, 2023, 2024; Lampert et al., 2016; Maguire, 1999, 2001, 2005b; Raffo and Hall, 2006). Those from working class backgrounds also have a sense of, and resist, having to leave behind the class background of their family of origin (Ingram, 2011; Keane, 2024; Maguire, 1999, 2005a, 2005b). The classed context of specific school environments has also come under investigation in terms of how it may align (or not) with that of the student teacher's class (cf. Ash et al., 2006; Hall and Jones, 2013; Jones, 2019; Lampert et al., 2016; Maguire, 2005b; Raffo and Hall, 2006). These studies have shown that those from working class backgrounds encounter additional challenges in relation to a sense of fitting in in more privileged schools (cf. Maguire, 2005b; Van Galen, 2008) although such feelings are not uncommon even in ‘tougher’ school contexts (Maguire, 2005b). Student teachers may also feel constrained by their class background in the type of school they feel they can work in (Jones, 2019).

In spite of these important findings, we still know very little about how teachers ² think about issues of social class, including class categorisations, and how their own positionality fits therein, and this is particularly the case for those from working class backgrounds. This article examines these issues in detail. How the participants’ classed identities impacted their perspectives as teachers and their engagement in schools was also significant in the current study, with the participants reporting that they ‘performed’ a higher social class in certain school environments, for example. However, these key themes are examined in detail elsewhere (cf. Keane, 2023, 2024).

Methodology

In this article, I draw on data generated as part of a constructivist grounded theory (CGT) study examining the social class identities and related experiences of 21 student teachers in Ireland from working class backgrounds who were participants in the APT project (2017–2023), a teacher diversity project in the University of Galway, funded by the HEA under PATH1. In this project, financial, academic and pastoral supports are offered to APT participants in completing ITE, a two-year postgraduate post-primary programme. As part of the project, they also participate in research, and this paper draws on one specific research strand which explored how they considered their class identities in the context of becoming a teacher, and, ostensibly, becoming middle class.

The APT project has supported 47 student teachers to date, and this paper draws on interviews with Phase 1 participants (N = 21). Of these, one was a member of the Irish Travelling community, the other 20 were white, Irish and of the settled community. Three were male, and 18 were female. To be eligible for APT, participants were required to have entered undergraduate level via a pre-entry Access programme, or the HEAR ³ , both of which required them to meet certain socio-economic criteria relating to family income. In this regard, all would be regarded ‘objectively’ as coming from lower socio-economic groups, ⁴ or as being from ‘working class’ backgrounds. All had obtained their ITE place having met requirements in a competitive system.

Grounded theory (Glaser and Strauss, 1967) is the most cited qualitative research methodology (Morse et al., 2021), including in education (Keane and Thornberg, 2025). However, while very commonly cited, its procedures and processes are commonly misunderstood and not always followed appropriately (Charmaz, 2014). Further, it is regarded as a contested methodology, as there is significant disagreement about its epistemological and ontological underpinnings, resulting in the development of at least three ‘schools’, the Glaserian school (e.g., Glaser, 1978, 1992), the Strauss and Corbin school (e.g., Strauss and Corbin, 1990), and, more recently the Constructivist school (Charmaz, 2006, 2014). Constructivist GT was selected due to its revised epistemological foundation (Charmaz, 2014) relative to Glaserian grounded theory (GT) which has been criticised due to its problematic objectivist basis (Charmaz et al., 2018). Notwithstanding, the Constructivist school maintains GT's core focus on conceptualisation.

A GT methodology requires an iterative approach to data generation and analysis, early analysis, and theoretical sampling through which conceptual gaps in the emerging analytic framework are ‘filled’ through further data collection (ibid). Implementing Constructivist GT enabled critical reflexivity throughout the project regarding participant and researcher positionalities, which was particularly important in this project given the focus on class identity (cf. Keane, 2022 for in-depth treatment).

Each of the 21 participants completed one in-depth interview, and 10 of the 21 agreed to a second interview, totalling 31 interviews, 10 in Round 1, 11 in Round 2, and a further 10 in Round 3. As part of the interviews, participants were asked about their views about social class and class-related categorisations and terminology, such as ‘socio-economic group’, ‘working class’ and ‘middle class’. Participants were also asked how they might describe their own class and wider identity, and how they felt talking about social class. Questions on these issues became more targeted as provisional categories were constructed throughout the three rounds of data generation and analysis (see Keane, 2023, 2024).

All interviews were transcribed verbatim. In line with a GT approach, analysis commenced early. Following line-by-line initial coding using gerunds, I engaged in focused coding (Charmaz, 2014), employing Glaser’s (1965) constant comparative technique, and memoing (writing analytic notes) throughout. The provisional categories and gaps therein informed the development of the Round 2 interview schedule. Following Round 2, the same approach to analysis was employed resulting in the construction of a revised set of categories and properties. A document summarising findings was drafted and shared with participants and they were invited to send feedback via email or participate in a second interview (N = 10). This third round of interviews was used as a participatory stage to share emerging findings and researcher interpretation in alignment with CGT constructivist principles (cf. Charmaz et al., 2018; Keane, 2015, 2022) as well as to fill emerging conceptual gaps. The data generated in this final round were analysed using the same analytic procedures previously described. The final analytic framework consisted of five categories with their attendant properties (cf. Keane, 2023, 2024) with two pertaining to how the participants understood class categorisations. Further analysis led to the merging of these two categories with two core properties: class being seen but not heard, and not wanting to class or be classed. Full ethical approval for the study was granted by the institutional Research Ethics Committee. Pseudonyms are used throughout.

Findings

Class being seen but not heard

The participants’ narratives were replete with examples of class-based inequalities that were offered as evidence of class still being relevant. They were clear that while they felt that social class in Ireland ‘…shouldn’t be relevant anymore’ (Ava, R3), and they would ‘…love it not to exist’ (Jane, R2), it ‘definitely still exists’ (Louise, R2). The participants reported that class was something that ‘kind of divides people’ (Aine, R2), and it was ‘something you can feel’ (Paul, R1), particularly in and through the Irish education system. They explained that class was also seen and felt in Ireland through people's expectations – of themselves and of others – that were linked to their family of origin. While they emphasised that they wished class inequalities were no longer an issue, they did not hold much hope. Indeed, participants reported that instead of being regarded as having intrinsic worth as a person, people were instead evaluated based on class-related criteria:

…everything should be equal, but it isn't, because class is still a division … I would love to see it change … if there was no more inequality in the world, but realistically it's still going to be there in some degree … [I'm] upset that people are still being pushed into boxes when it shouldn't really feature, you should be looking at the person as a person, not about their money or their social standing or how they walk, dress, talk. That shouldn't be in it, but it still is. And that's what makes me sad. (Brigid, R2)

Despite seeing and reporting so many class-based inequalities engrained in everyday life, the participants emphasised that people generally did not talk about class in Ireland; it was – notably – not a topic of discussion. The participants suggested that this was a deliberate approach adopted by Irish people:

I think it's funny in Ireland, we are so sensitive about different class groups. It is so kind of integral to our society and people are so aware of it. But they just don’t talk about it … they don’t want to talk about it. (Esther, R3)

… people just don't like to talk about it and it's never a conversation … but it's one of those things that's there … brushed under the carpet … Ireland, there's a lot of things brushed under the carpet … engrained in everybody that nobody kind of discusses but everybody knows. (Jane, R2)

When asked why this was the case, participants explained that it was intimidating, awkward, and emotional to talk about, particularly as it tended to surface issues related to one's family of origin:

… the whole shame thing, that a lot of people don't feel comfortable opening up about it because it's something that's very close to you. A lot of it is to do with family. I think that you can be very much judged on your social class … it is a touchy subject. (Catherine, R2)

Several noted that talking about class was uncomfortable which they connected to their belief that part of being Irish was not wanting others to know too much about oneself. Some also perceived the idea of class as being quite ‘British’ (and therefore, un-Irish):

It does make me feel slightly uncomfortable. I suppose like all Irish people, you get uncomfortable when people start trying to figure out where you come from and what category to put you into. (Sophie, R2)

…there's something British about it … there's that hierarchy, it's very sensitive. It's just not a topic people talk about. … I just don’t like that term – ‘social class’. It strikes a chord or something … you don’t like hearing that term, ‘social class’. (Ava, R3)

This did not mean that class was not talked about in Ireland, however. Several participants observed that people used different terminology or euphemisms to express perceptions of people's class positioning. Euphemisms included saying someone was ‘well off’, for example, or involved the use of specific class-related indicators such as job titles, addresses, type and size of house or car, and so forth.

…we don't actually address it directly … we try and cover it up with different words - jobs and locations. ‘So and so's from there, and this is why they're like that’ … we try to mask it with other things. (Esther, R1)

…class is there, but it's not something we talk about … we'd never mention those words … if we were talking about someone from a privileged background, it'd be more like ‘Oh, they're well-to-do’, … I think it's an Irish term … ‘well-to-do’, ‘they're doing well in life’. (Aine, R2)

Not wanting to class or be classed

When considering how they might describe themselves in terms of class, some participants expressed confusion about class categorisations and terminology, ⁵ but most ⁶ described themselves using terms such as ‘lower class’, ‘low-income family’, ‘lower working class’, ‘working class single-parent family’, ‘financially working class’, ‘working class’, ‘disadvantaged background’, and ‘deprived’.

…I'm working class … I grew up in a working class single-parent family … (Paul, R1)

I came from a working class family. … my mother isn't a solicitor, a doctor, she cleans for a living, and my father's unemployed because he has an addiction. (Martina, R1)

In describing their class backgrounds, many talked about sensing lower expectations of themselves at school and at home. Catherine, Elizabeth and Louise, for example, reported ‘relaxed’ family attitudes towards education and school attendance, and pointed to the limiting role of scarce financial resources in relation to their potential to engage in education, particularly where families had several children. Importantly, most expressed disquiet about class categorisations, directly linking class terminology and related categorisations to ‘stigma, shame and embarrassment’ (Aine, R2). Liz, who described herself as coming ‘from a low economic income family’ and ‘socially deprived’, emphasised that she did not wish to be categorised at all in class terms, and expressed concern about the implications of class categorisations. Her discomfort was palpable:

…I don't want to fit into any particular one, but I definitely know what one I don't want to be in … I am ‘no’ classes (laughs). … I'm uncomfortable with anybody categorising me … I am all classes. I love being anonymous … You should be able to live your life and not be afraid of anybody putting a label on you, but unfortunately we live in a labelling society … I'm very cautious because I’ve gone through spells of high embarrassment. I never wanted that to go on to the next generation … I know the repercussions. I know the labelling and the categories you're put into, and I don't like it … I'm not afraid of class. I'm not afraid of saying what class I'm in, but I don't want anybody else stipulating what class I'm in…. (Liz, R1)

The participants emphasised not liking class categorisations in general, seeing them as unfair, explaining that everyone was or should be seen as equal, though they recognised that people were not treated as such.

…people still class themselves working class, middle class, higher class. And they shouldn't, especially in schools. I want it to go away, it's not right. … I come from a working class, low money background … we lived hand to mouth … but I don't want there to be classes…. (Brigid, R2)

…‘Class’. It is a bad word, it's a horrible word because we are categorising people … it's hard to talk about because you are actually uncovering something that exists, but you don't like the fact that it exists … (Liz, R1)

As part of this, they explained that they did not want to categorise other people in class terms, and most did not wish to be categorised themselves:

…you feel like you're putting people into categories and you don't want to … you kind of don't even want to put yourself in one…. (Ava, Round 1)

When you say ‘social class’, it's almost as if you're ranking people into groups and hierarchies. I'd prefer to look at someone as an individual rather than their class or their background … unfortunately we are grouped into classes, even on the census forms, we're grouped…. (Martina, R1)

The participants explained not wanting to categorise people because it involved looking down on someone or being looked down upon:

…When you put yourself into a class, it is a case of looking down on somebody, or you being looked down on … there's always somebody above you but there's also somebody beneath you … if you're looked down on … you don't feel you're worth anything … it's very hard to position yourself because you don't want to be looking down on anybody else, and you don't want to be looked down on. (Jane, R2)

…we never want to be the person being looked down upon, or the person that's looking down on someone else … it is uncomfortable knowing that you're above or below someone…. (Esther, R1)

The idea of looking down on someone or being looked down upon produced very uncomfortable feelings as they were closely related to judgements of relative worth. As Louise commented, class categorisations resulted in feelings that ‘you're better than them’ or ‘you feel like they are better than you’ (Louise, R2). The participants explained in more detail the nature of the discomfort experienced in this context, highlighting feelings of shame, embarrassment, and, crucially, of being ‘… of less value’ (Sophie, R2) and ‘… a little bit worthless’ (Aine, R2). Highlighting that nobody had ever chosen the family into which they were born, and thus, the social group into which they were categorised, the participants also expressed cognisance of the unfairness of class categorisations and related judgements.

The uncomfortable feeling comes from the shame … if it's yourself who's on a lower degree of social class, then there's a bit of shame, embarrassment about someone being above you, and you wondering what they think of you…. (Esther, R1)

For Sophie, there were significant health implications of being looked down upon in society:

…I was kind of labelled as ‘lower economic’ social class … I don't think it's fair to class people … having someone looking down at you, you just feel like you're a piece of dirt, that you're never going to amount to anything, and it's not a nice feeling like, … it gives you serious mental issues, you get depressed and upset, you keep thinking about it … issues on your mental health and physical health…. (Sophie, R3)

There was a strong sense that class judgements were, in fact, dehumanising, in the sense that being categorised in classed terms meant you were somehow disregarded as a human being:

I would never want someone to feel as small as I felt when people looked down on me … makes you feel like you're not worthy, and people are better than you … if you're put into a category … it's taking out the fact that you're a human being…. (Sophie, R2)

…the whole idea of looking down on or someone looking down on you makes you feel uncomfortable, like you're not being respected and you're not being respectful … And you wouldn't want someone to hurt your feelings and you therefore don't want to inflict that on someone else … You're a person after all … if you are doing that, you are dehumanising … You're taking away that person's personality and their feelings from them. (Brigid, R3)

Some participants emphasised not liking class categorisations as they did not want others to judge their family of origin negatively, and others worried that such categorisations would lead other people to have lower expectations of them than might otherwise be the case.

Discussion and conclusion

Social class: Seen but not heard

Like in Savage et al. (2001), the participants accepted that class existed but regretted its ongoing salience. Emphasising that they wished class was no longer relevant in society today, they did not hold much hope of class-based inequalities being addressed. Their views about the prevalence of related inequalities in Irish society echo Breen and Whelan’s (1996) comments about the rigidity of class barriers in Ireland in terms of the impact on citizens’ life chances relative to other countries. Notwithstanding their acceptance of the pervasiveness and rigidity of class-related inequalities, the participants emphasised that class was rarely if ever spoken about and was ‘brushed under the carpet’ (Jane, R2) in Ireland. As previously noted, the power of class is seen in how difficult people find it to speak about (Bourdieu, 1984; Skeggs, 1997). In Ireland, as reported by the participants, silence about class is particularly deafening, perhaps because class is viewed as something quite British (Breen and Whelan, 1996) in Ireland's post-colonial context. This silence is interesting given the very high level of class awareness in the Republic of Ireland, which has been found to exceed that in the United States, Australia, Norway, Germany, and Italy, and to be just below levels of class awareness in Britain and Northern Ireland (Hayes and McAllister, 1995). High class awareness would seem to persist in Ireland, including amongst those from working class backgrounds, as evidenced by their significant engagement in social media, as a form of self-representation, to highlight forms of classism in education (cf. Lowe, 2023). Given such a high level of awareness, it is unsurprising that, according to the participants, class-related issues were observed and talked about by Irish people in everyday discourse, albeit using the strategy of euphemising – using different terminology and specific indicators, such as possessions and address – to express perceptions of people's class positioning while not mentioning the term ‘class’. Talking about people who are ‘well off’ or those who are ‘from the estate’ can be understood as a distancing (self) protective device (cf. Keane, 2011) employed to indicate mutual understandings about how people are positioned regarding class in relative terms, whilst simultaneously protecting the speaker and the hearer from the uncomfortable feelings elicited by more directly acknowledging class differences. Payne and Grew (2005: 902) remark that ‘it is possible to talk about class without ever mentioning the c-word’, noting that it may be class being discussed when people use terms relating to income, occupation, inequalities, attitudes, housing, educational qualifications, lifestyles, and aspirations. The use of euphemistic terminology to indicate class differences has also been found in other studies. For example, in a study with undergraduate students from working and middle class backgrounds in Irish higher education, Keane (2011) reported that the participants were uncomfortable with the concept and language of social class, preferring to use terms such as ‘poor’, ‘wealthy’, and ‘snobby’. More than 20 years ago, Lynch and Lodge (2002: 39) pointed out that issues of class were generally discussed in Irish policy in euphemistic terms (see also Muntaner et al., 2001) and emphasised that such practice was problematic as it served to ‘remove class issues from their relational power and economic contexts and make mobilising for change around class all the more challenging’. O'Sullivan (2005) also pointed to the absence of social class in Ireland's policy discourse relating to education. In this context, Cahill (2015: 303) calls for the repositioning and recognition of social class in educational equality debates, policies and legislation arguing that doing so ‘would re-assert the causality of such issues as material poverty to educational performance…’ and draws on Thrupp and Lupton’s (2006) observations about ideologies of classlessness being a feature of post-colonial nations such as New Zealand and Ireland. The silence about social class in Ireland is not helped by its absence among the ‘nine grounds’ in Ireland's equality legislation (The Equal Status Acts, 2000–2018), which prohibits discrimination on the grounds of gender, marital status, family status, age, disability, sexual orientation, race, religion, and membership of the Traveller community. Equality commentators and activists have been advocating for the addition of a tenth ground based on socio-economic status for the last number of years (cf. Kadar, 2016). The absence of social class in policy and legislation has contributed to the discourse of classlessness – in terms of avoiding explicitly naming social class – amongst this study's participants.

Not wanting to class or be classed

Most participants used terms associated with working class backgrounds in describing their own class identities. Hayes and McAllister (1995) also found a very strong association between objective class position and subjective class identity amongst respondents from both the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland, with the vast majority of those from working class backgrounds (on ‘objective’ measures) also choosing a working class identity. My finding echoes those of other studies in which class origins have been shown to exert an enduring influence on individuals’ self-identities, with this being particularly the case for those from working class backgrounds experiencing some level of upward social mobility (Friedman et al., 2021; Friedman, 2016; Ingram, 2011; Lawler, 1999). However, despite describing themselves in class-based terms, most of the participants expressed disquiet about class categorisations and, like in Savage et al.'s (2001) study, many voiced a desire to personally reject them. Not wanting to class or be classed, they reported not wanting to categorise other people in class terms, and most did not wish to be categorised themselves. Categorising involved, they felt, looking down on someone or being looked down upon. Social categorisation exerts a profound effect on how individuals see themselves (Anthias, 2013). Bourdieu (1989: 19) has argued that ‘nothing classifies somebody more than the way he or she classifies’. Perhaps cognisant of this, my participants voiced a desire to not classify others. In conceptualising subjective class identity, their perspectives were in line with what Friedman et al. (2021: 3) see as a ‘relational form of “position taking” where one not only claims membership in a particular symbolic community … but also draws a boundary between their own location and other social groupings’. The participants explained that both positions – looking down on someone and being looked down upon – produced uncomfortable feelings rooted in shame and/or embarrassment. Class categorisations were seen as being based on judgements of worth and expectation – including in relation to one's family of origin – and thus were potentially dehumanising. This is unsurprising given that subjective class identities are understood as being constituted by affective, cultural, and emotional dimensions as well as material components (Friedman et al., 2021).

Ambivalence about personal class identities is commonly reported, with people regularly disidentifying with class groupings on a personal level (Savage et al., 2001; Skeggs, 1997) to ‘evade social fixing’ (Savage et al., 2001: 889). Indeed, such ambivalence can be viewed from the perspective of Savage's (2000, see also 2016) ‘class paradox’, through which people's subjective alignment with class groups is denied or declines even as they acknowledge social inequalities to be increasing and identify the role of social class therein, and even as it is simultaneously ‘strongly experienced as part of an individual's sense of self’ (Savage, 2016: 64). For those from middle class backgrounds, it may be understood as a strategy that assists in rendering (middle) class advantage invisible (Ball, 2003, see also Skeggs, 2005). The avoidance of class categorisation for those from working class backgrounds is linked to the long-term pathologisation of ‘valueless’ working class identities (Blackman, 1996; Lawler, 2005; Loveday, 2014; Reay, 2005; Skeggs, 2004). The participants’ recognition that both positions – of looking down on and being looked down on – were uncomfortable point to a shared understanding that people's class positionings and related lived experiences are unfair and unjust, that is, that what is in operation is either a form of unearned privilege, or unearned disadvantage. This aligns with Sayer's (2002: 4.13) argument about people's sense that class differences are ‘illegitimate, being based largely on luck, rather than worth or merit’. The uncomfortable feelings the participants reported that were rooted in shame and/or embarrassment demonstrate their awareness that class categorisations fundamentally threaten people's sense of self-dignity and self-respect (Savage et al., 2001) through moral evaluations of worthiness (Sayer, 2002). Indeed, Sayer (2002: 4.13) argues that people's unease and ambivalence is a reasonable response to the injustices of class, commenting that ‘The lucky may realise that they are lucky and not want to be seen as claiming superiority because of this, while the unlucky/poor will quite reasonably resist any conclusion that they deserve their disadvantages’. As Anna (R2) wryly observed, ‘you haven't chosen to be in this social group’. Skeggs and Loveday (2012: 283) argue that through class categorisations, people ‘inherit’ the related inequalities and injustices ‘…which are then symbolically repeated as ugly feelings, as a moral measure of a person’ and understandably lead to ‘justifiable resentments’. The participants’ perspectives on class and related categorisations inform our understandings of social class and its conceptualisation and enactment in Ireland.

While the participants’ social class identities impacted their perspectives as teachers and their engagement in schools, these key themes are examined in detail elsewhere (cf. Keane, 2023, 2024). As previously indicated, this paper has focused on how this group of student teachers from working class backgrounds thought about issues of social class, including their own class positionalities. In studies on teaching and class, participants from working class backgrounds are clear that they remain so despite their upwardly mobile trajectories (cf. Maguire, 2005a). This was also the case for the participants in the current study; while their desire to reject class categorisations was evident, they simultaneously emphasised remaining working class and not becoming middle class, even highlighting the moral value in inhabiting their class identity of origin (cf. Keane, 2024). More generally, however, along with the ‘sidelining’ of issues of class in teaching in the past (Maguire, 2005b: 428), and the underutilisation of cultural approaches to class in teacher education (Jones, 2019; Reay, 2006), there has been very little focus on how student teachers and/or teachers consider their class identities and related class dis/identifications. Some research in the 1980s explored teachers’ ‘objective’ class categorisations based on the belief that subjective class identifications were determined by economic position (Maguire, 2005b). Only Jones’ (2019) study included significant engagement with subjective class identities. In her study, the class identities of novice teachers were explored relative to different classed school contexts, with the student teachers either avoiding or accepting crossing classed boundaries and reconstructing their identities in what they felt were necessary ways. Jones (2019: 607) concludes that class identities ‘are potentially troubling territory for all novice teachers, both working class and middle class’, observing that some are constrained in making choices about their teaching futures, pointing to the importance of their examination during teacher education. Such work assumes even greater importance as drives to diversify the teaching profession, including along social class lines, continue apace; learning about how student teachers from under-represented groups understand their identities is vital so that appropriate interventions can be developed in ITE to assist them in their personal and professional development. Further research on the perspectives of student teachers from diverse social class backgrounds on their conceptualisations of class is advocated and would provide a useful starting point within teacher education for wider discussions about equality outcomes in and through education and implications for inclusive teaching.