Family practices among Swedish parents: extracurricular activities and social class

ABSTRACT

Research suggests that compared with working-class parents, middle-class parents more commonly enrol their children in organised activities with the aim of increasing their prospects of future success in education and working life. Organised activities are seen as an important contribution to the reproduction of social class. Drawing on a Bourdieusian understanding of social class, this study contributes by exploring class-based reasoning about extracurricular activities among Swedish parents. Sweden provides a markedly different institutional and social context than is usually found in the literature. In the present study, interviews with 37 working-class and middle-class parents are qualitatively analysed. Findings show similarities in parents’ reasoning, indicating that Swedish parenting culture and childrearing ideals partly cross class boundaries. They also suggest, however, that the middle-class parents typically regarded extracurricular activities as more important, and enrolled their children in more activities, than the working-class parents. The contradiction between similarities emanating from dominant national cultural understandings of parenting and childrearing and dissimilarities based on class-culture socialisation is explored in this article. One tentative conclusion is that working-class parents’ lower participation levels are not only explained by cultural and financial resources but also by limited control over working hours.

KEYWORDS:

• Extracurricular activities
• parenting culture
• concerted cultivation
• time pressure
• social class

1. Introduction

The importance of parenting practices and cultures for the reproduction of social class and inequality has received growing interest in recent decades (Lareau 2002; Devine 2004; Reay 2005; Klett-Davis 2010; Irwin and Elley 2011; Shih and Yi 2014). Much of this research uses the theoretical framework developed by Pierre Bourdieu (1986, 2010), which views families as important sites for the transmission of different forms of capital between generations. Within this field of research, differences between working-class and middle-class children’s participation in extracurricular activities has received increasing attention. Findings suggest that compared with working-class parents, middle-class parents more commonly enrol their children in organised activities with the aim of transmitting life skills to their children and thereby increasing children’s prospects of future success in education and employment (Lareau 2002; Chin and Phillips 2004; Dumais 2006; Vincent and Ball 2007; Lleras 2008; Fredericks and Eccles 2010; Snellman et al. 2015). This research is an important source of inspiration for the present study. The majority of studies originate from the UK and the US, countries that are characterised as ‘liberal welfare state regimes’ in which the state’s role in welfare production and allocation is modest (Esping-Andersen 2002).

This study contributes to the discussion by exploring class-based reasoning about extracurricular activities among Swedish parents. As a ‘social-democratic welfare regime’, Sweden provides a markedly different institutional and social context than is usually found in the literature. A growing body of research on parenting, class culture and social reproduction is, however, emerging in the Scandinavian countries (Forsberg 2009; Stefansen and Skogen 2010; Stefansen 2011; Stefansen and Aarseth 2011; Berg and Peltola 2015; Aarseth 2016; Stefansen et al. 2016). Some of this research highlights parenting practices with respect to extracurricular activities. The present study adds to this research by pointing out two different orientations towards extracurricular activities within working-class families. It also tentatively suggests that working-class parents’ lower participation levels are not only explained by cultural and financial resources, but also by limited control over working hours.

We draw on a Bourdieusian understanding of social class, which highlights the cultural aspects of reproduction of social inequality. Social classes are seen as social groups that share similar living conditions and dispositions (Bourdieu 1986). Social class is thus understood to include not only indicators such as income and occupation but also indicators such as level of education and lifestyle (Swartz 1997: 151). By ‘extracurricular activities’, we refer to voluntary activities organised outside school. They may be organised by different types of actors and be of different kinds.¹

2. Parental practices and the reproduction of social class

Different types of studies suggest that involvement in organised activities facilitates continued school engagement and academic achievement (Eccles et al. 2003). Researchers also seem to agree that (middle-class) children in Western societies spend a larger portion of their day in activities organised and supervised by adults than they did some decades ago (Dunn et al. 2003; Vincent and Ball 2006; Kremer-Sadlik et al. 2010; Stirrup et al. 2015; Stefansen et al. 2016). The increased structuring of children’s everyday lives tends to reduce play that is unmediated and uncontrolled by adults, and children’s play spaces are increasingly regulated and supervised (Mose 2016: 4–6, 13–16). This ‘institutionalization of childhood’ (Holloway and Pimplott-Wilson 2014) has been understood in terms of the professionalisation and intensification of parenting. The argument is that parents increasingly understand their children as projects to be developed and improved (Furedi 2008: 103). Engaging the child in extracurricular activities has thus become an important part of ‘good’ parenting (Vincent and Ball 2007: 1065; Berg and Peltola 2015; Vincent and Maxwell 2016: 271). Expressions such as ‘parental determinism’ (Furedi 2008) and ‘intensive mothering’ (Hays 1996) signal changes in parental practices.

However, researchers maintain that intensive parenting is, above all, a middle-class phenomenon in which parents strategically manage the reproduction of advantages and social mobility (Jenks 2005: 73–87; Mose 2016). One of the most influential studies is that of Annette Lareau (2002, 2011). Applying Bourdieu’s theoretical framework, she identified two different cultural orientations in US middle-class and working-class families that guided parental practices. These ‘cultural logics’ included the ways daily life was organised, the use of language and social connections (Lareau 2002: 752–753). Middle-class parents enacted ‘concerted cultivation’, whereas working-class parents acted according to the ‘logic of natural growth’. The former denotes the strategic ambition to cultivate children’s capabilities and talents, whereas in the latter, parents assume that children grow and develop naturally as long as they are safe, loved, and cared for. Several studies support Lareu’s findings (e.g. Vincent and Ball 2007; Bodovski 2010; Cheadle and Amato 2010; Stefansen 2011; Wheeler 2014; Stirrup et al. 2015). Studies have also highlighted the gendered nature of parenting, noting that it is mainly mothers who are considered responsible for the hard work involved in intensive parenting/mothering. Mothers are ‘advised to expend a tremendous amount of time, energy, and money in raising their children’ (Hays 1996: x).

In line with the notion of cultural cultivation, Lareau’s research demonstrated that middle-class children participated in extracurricular activities much more than working-class children did. Parents believed that enrolling their child in organised activities was a way to cultivate the child’s talents and abilities and thus was a means to realise children’s potential and enhance their future opportunities. The findings of other studies are similar (Chin and Phillips 2004; Dumais 2006; Vincent and Ball 2007; Lleras 2008; Fredericks and Eccles 2010; Snellman et al. 2015). However, some researchers argue that working-class parents are increasingly adopting the same parenting culture as middle-class parents: concerted cultivation (Bennet et al. 2012: 153; Vincent and Maxwell 2016).

Not all studies have identified a clear difference between working-class and middle-class parents’ cultural orientation. To explain working-class children’s lower participation in organised activities, this body of research emphasises structural constraints, such as limited economic resources. It notes that not all families can afford the costs associated with organised activities (Chin and Phillips 2004; Irwin and Elley 2011; Bennet et al. 2012; Holloway and Pimplott-Wilson 2014; Siraj and Mayo 2014). From this perspective, class differences in children’s extracurricular activities are explained not by unwillingness among working-class parents to cultivate the skills, talents, and abilities of their child but by limited access to economic resources. Although studies disagree regarding the importance of cultural and structural mechanisms, they generally agree that middle-class parents’ higher involvement, or parental investment, translates into future advantages for children (Dumais 2006; Bodovski and Farkas 2008; Lleras 2008; Snellman et al. 2015).

3. The Swedish context

The Swedish welfare model has emphasised a reduction in social inequalities. Welfare responsibilities are considered the shared responsibility of the family and the state. This perspective is closely linked to gender equality as a political aim is to realise the dual-earner/dual-carer family model (Ellingsaeter and Leira 2006: 2). Approximately 9 out of 10 Swedish children aged one to five years are in licensed childcare. They spend an average of approximately 32 hours a week at a childcare centre (The Swedish National Agency for Education 2007). Much of children’s activities are thus organised by preschools and schools. Outside this setting, organised activities take place during late afternoons, evenings, and weekends. These activities are often run by voluntary associations with no or low enrolment fees, although there is also a private market.

The extensive and affordable childcare serves the goal of reducing gender inequalities by enabling high labour market participation among mothers. Moreover, mothers’ paid work promotes class equality by reducing child poverty. The licensed childcare also reduces class inequalities by counteracting the reproduction of family differences in cultural capital, thereby reducing the ‘inheritance effect’ (Esping-Andersen 2002: 27, 2016: 82; Meagher and Szebehely 2012: 98–102).

Although Sweden is recognised as a fairly equal society, class inequalities remain. The income gap has actually increased markedly since the 1980s, more so than in any other OECD country (OECD 2017: 24, 37, 39). Income differences between occupational groups are substantial, and educational choice is clearly influenced by social background (Bengtsson et al. 2012: 141–146). Class also corresponds to lifestyle indicators, such as reading books and a daily newspaper, going to the theatre and travelling abroad (Oskarsson 2012: 131). Although the Swedish welfare model has reduced inequalities, families remain important institutions for both the enactment and reproduction of social class.

4. Study design

To explore Swedish parents’ views of extracurricular activities, we analysed qualitative data from individual interviews with 46 mothers and 14 fathers. The interviewees were all parents of at least one child between three and six years old, and the majority had two or three children (of different ages). We recruited participants to the study via preschools, schools, and an advertisement in a family web magazine (familjeliv.se). This strategy was successful. More than 200 parents, mainly mothers, volunteered to participate in the study. We selected 60 parents with different occupations, levels of education and income. They lived in different residential areas in Sweden, and the vast majority were born in Sweden. To capture parents’ understandings and experiences, the interviews were relatively open (cf. Mason 2002). A semi-structured interview guide was used to cover themes such as everyday family life, parenting practices and ideals, and children’s activities outside of childcare or school. The role of extracurricular activities was a theme that emerged from the first interviews and was subsequently added to the interview guide. The analysis in this paper focuses mainly on parents’ talk about children’s organised activities. Most of the interviews were conducted face to face (N 40), but for practical reasons, some were telephone interviews (N 20). The face-to-face interviews lasted two hours on average, and the telephone interviews were somewhat shorter. Otherwise, there was no noteworthy difference between the two types of interviews. All interviews were transcribed verbatim. The Regional Ethical Review Board approved the study.

The analysis began when notes were taken immediately after the interviews. Summaries were written after the interviews were carefully read. The research software NVivo was used in the coding process. We looked for patterns in the data by sorting parents according to their reasoning about extracurricular activities. We identified themes emerging from the interviews (e.g. ‘time poverty’). Theoretical concepts, such as ‘concerted cultivation’ and ‘institutionalization of childhood’ also played a role in the analysis of the data as we oscillated between theory and empirical interpretation (cf. Layder 1998).

‘Social class’ was obviously an important theoretical concept in our analysis. As mentioned in the introduction to this paper, social class is understood as social groups that share similar living conditions and dispositions. In this paper, however, we had to confine our social class indicators to access to economic capital (income) and cultural capital (education and occupation). As we were particularly interested in parental practices and values in different social milieus, or family habitus (Bourdieu 1986), we considered both the interviewees’ and their partners’ or spouses’ income, education and occupation (cf. Tomanovic 2004; Stefansen and Aarseth 2011).² We defined ‘middle-class families’ as families in which both partners had professional or managerial jobs (e.g. physician, human resources manager), higher education (university degree) and total monthly earnings exceeding 7000 Euro. ‘Working-class families’ were those in which both partners had manual or service jobs (e.g. industrial worker, assistant nurse), lower education and monthly earnings less than 5000 Euro. The income categories are in line with official statistics showing that the lowest 25th income percentile earns less than 2500 Euro and the highest 75th percentile earns 3500 Euro or above (Statistics Sweden 2014). In ‘cross-class families’, one partner had a working-class job and the other had a middle-class job and/or the partners had different levels of education. As we intended to explore possible differences between working-class and middle-class families’ reasoning about extracurricular activities, we left cross-class families out from the analysis in this paper. The following analysis is thus grounded on the interviews with the working-class (N 20) and middle-class (17) families.

5. Results

In general, extracurricular activities are an important part of Swedish everyday family life. The most common activities are sports and other activities involving physical training (Statistics Sweden 2009). The parents in our study mirrored this general picture. They typically enrolled their children in organised activities when the children were older than three years. The middle-class children were, however, in most cases engaged in more activities than the working-class children, although a few working-class children were also enrolled in several activities. The parents who did not enrol their children in such activities were exclusively working-class. In the following sections, we take a closer look at the ways in which parents discussed children’s extracurricular activities and explore the reasons for enrolling (or not enrolling) children in such activities.

5.1. Reasons and returns

Whether working-class or middle class, parents whose children participated in extracurricular activities frequently mentioned three types of reasons and returns. They assumed that the child would develop (i) social skills, (ii) physical skills and health and (iii) enjoyment and well-being. The first reason was related to children learning and improving social skills, such as cooperative and interactional capabilities. The second reason was connected to the parents’ assumption that physical exercise is important to children’s health and physical skills. Some parents also emphasised that engaging in physical activities from an early age fosters (good) routines that last into adult life. Parents furthermore expressed concerns about their children spending far too much time in front of devices such as computers and being overly sedentary. The third reason was that children have fun participating in these activities.

The parents in our study emphasised that they always listened to their children’s opinions when choosing activities. Johanna was a 37-year-old supervisor employed in a public treatment centre and the mother of two (1.5 and 4 years old). Her views of extracurricular activities and their expected returns serve as an example:

I think it is very important that they have activities. […] I think that it is good to do something physical, to exercise and all of that. But I also think that it is about social learning, to be together with others in a group and follow given rules and that you have to do things when you are told to. Please, understand me right. A lot of children want to decide everything by themselves, but I think it is pretty good for them to understand that in some contexts, someone else makes the decisions, and you have to do things in a certain way. But then I also think that it should be fun as well. You should not have activities just for the sake of having them. It must be something that they actually enjoy doing. (Johanna, middle class)

Perspectives such as Johanna’s were not limited to middle-class parents. Frida was a 36-year-old administrator and a mother of two children (6 and 8 years old). In the quote below, she underlines that engaging in sports is an important means for children to develop social skills:

Because, after all, it is a very small group when you practice bandy, for example, or taekwondo, or whatever it might be. After all, it is a small version of how life will be when becoming an adult. So you want to … get them to be able to cooperate and all of that. (Frida, working-class)

Julia was a 29-year-old mother of three children (5, 9, and 11 years old). For a living, she handed out food samples at a shop and worked as a stand-in in a nursing home for autistic adults. Similar to Julia and Frida, her children’s engagement in organised activities was future oriented:

I think exercise is very important. Sure, they have gym class in school, but you must establish an interest after school as well that you stick to. Gym class in school is not there forever; you leave school at some point. So I think that you have to sort of lay the groundwork early on for an interest in exercising. (Julia, working-class)

Both the working-class and the middle-class parents talked about organised activities as fun with an additional enrichment value. They wanted their children to enjoy the activities, but they also emphasised that organised activities might help their children develop skills and capabilities that would benefit them throughout life (cf. Vincent and Ball 2007). The ways in which most middle-class and many working-class parents reasoned about extracurricular activities thus revealed an orientation towards the future and a belief in the possibility – and perhaps the obligation – to shape or influence the kind of person their child was to become. In this sense, the motives for enrolling children in organised activities might be understood as entailing a strategic element. However, the parents in our study did not discuss the importance for their children of learning to compete and achieve. Rather, activities were perceived as a significant way to help children learn social skills and become healthy youngsters and adults (cf. Berg and Peltola 2015; Aarseth 2016). Even though the parents did not reason in terms of social mobility and securing class privileges, involvement in extracurricular activities might nonetheless have that long-term outcome.

Previous research has noted that middle-class parents display a strong commitment to encouraging and supporting the interests of their children and that they view children’s devotion to an activity as more important than the activity itself. Stefansen and Aarseth (2011: 394–395) argue that this is one aspect of concerted cultivation. An additional finding in our study is that parents’ willingness to satisfy the wishes of their child is related to respecting the child as an equal, at least to some extent. Nonetheless, both working-class and middle-class parents tended to see worth in their children developing an interest, regardless of what that interest might be.

5.2. Classed patterns

Besides similarities in the ways that the middle-class and the working-class parents talked about extracurricular activities, we identified class-based cultural orientations. The middle-class parents typically put more emphasis on the importance of extracurricular activities than the working-class parents, and in most cases, their children participated in more organised activities. Extracurricular activities were central to the organisation of the everyday life of many middle-class families (cf. Lareau 2002).

Adriana was a 35-year-old mother of two children (aged 3 and 5 years) who was employed as a school counsellor. The following quote depicts a hectic family life in which the children’s activities are integrated into the everyday routines. Adriana spontaneously brought up the children’s extracurricular activities when describing a typical week:

You must keep track of all of [the children’s] activities, of course. Which child must bring packed food? And when does that one play tennis? What time is that child going to floorball? Is there a birthday party? Should presents be bought? And then you should work in between this as well. [Laughs] And what should we eat for dinner? (Adriana, middle class)

Adriana’s description of a typical week in her family is a good illustration of intensive mothering/parenting (cf. Hays 1996) and the effort and time necessary to practice this style of parenting. In general, Swedish middle-class parents spend more time than ever with and on their children, more so than working-class parents do (Esping-Andersen 2016: 11). Driving children to activities – not to mention staying with them during the activities – is time consuming. The middle-class parents frequently mentioned extracurricular activities when talking about their sense of lacking time or describing stress in their lives. They also talked about the risks connected to over-scheduling.

In contrast to the middle-class parents, working-class parents typically did not appear to consider organised activities very important in and of themselves. To reiterate the wording of Stefansen et al. (2016: 7), they took ‘a more relaxed approach’ to extracurricular activities than the middle-class parents. The working-class parents reported that the main reason for engaging in such activities was to satisfy their children’s wishes to attend. Some expressed ambivalence, saying that organised activities might have some importance but that children should not engage in too many of them. In the following quote, Niklas, a 40-year-old industrial worker and father of two children (6 and 3 years old), explained why he did not think extracurricular activities were important:

No, it’s not something that I think is important. Rather, I think … we talk about it and discuss if there is something in particular [the six-year-old daughter] feels like doing or busying herself with, but, no … I don’t push for it. Nothing should be a must-do during the childhood years. They ought to do what they think is fun. […] Children should be allowed to be children. (Niklas, working-class)

The working-class parents’ reasoning was not identical, however. One group of working-class parents stated that organised activities were unimportant and did not engage in them. The other group enrolled their children in extracurricular activities, albeit fewer than the middle-class parents. Their motives for enrolling their children were partly similar to those of the middle-class parents. Like the middle-class parents they valued organised activities because they assumed that their children would benefit from them later in life. Working-class parents in this group primarily underlined the present-day value, however. They perceived organised activities as valuable because they offer children something meaningful to do. That is, these activities are superior to being occupied with smartphones or tablets, watching TV or just wandering. Pernilla, for example, maintained that extracurricular activities are important because they prevent children from just sitting around. To this end, she was willing to make an effort to try to satisfy the wishes of her oldest child. She was a 27-year-old mother of two (8 months and 5 years old) who worked as a receptionist.

He [the five-year-old] has tried a lot of activities. We have tried gymnastics, he has practiced football from time to time, just too … ‘No, I want to try bandy instead’. So then he can try bandy to find a recreational activity. […] I think it is important for the children to not only stay at home and sit in front of the TV. Rather, it is better that they have something that they like to do and not only to loiter. (Pernilla, working-class)

The above quote illustrates that extracurricular activities were considered a means to helping children engage in meaningful activities. This type of reasoning was primarily oriented not towards acquiring competences needed in the future but towards counteracting children’s passivity in the present. It was exclusive to parents from the working-class.

To sum up, our research not only points out similarities between the working-class and middle-class families. It also shows class-based differences in cultural orientations. The middle-class parents typically enrolled their children in more extracurricular activities, and tended to value organised activities more than working-class parents. The working-class parents’ views were diverse. One group of parents did not engage in extracurricular activities and found such activities unimportant. They believed it was better for their children to spend time with the family and interact spontaneously with friends. Although not as future-oriented and more relaxed than middle-class parents, another group of working-class parents enrolled their children in extracurricular activities for reasons similar to those of middle-class families.

5.3. Economic poverty versus time poverty

In contrast to international research (Chin and Phillips 2004; Irwin and Elley 2011; Bennet et al. 2012; Holloway and Pimplott-Wilson 2014; Siraj and Mayo 2014), the parents in our study did not bring up limited economic resources as a reason for limiting the number of extracurricular activities in which their children participated. One plausible explanation is that, in Sweden, popular activities, such as football and floorball, are mostly run by voluntary associations in which enrolment fees are low or non-existent. Extracurricular activities may therefore be less costly in Sweden than in many other countries. A complementary explanation for low-income families’ engagement in organised activities might be that joining such activities is highly prioritised among Swedish families (cf. Stefansen et al. 2016). This said, none of the working-class children practiced expensive sports such as ice hockey, tennis, or horseback riding.

Rather than referring to a lack of money, the parents in this study discussed ‘time poverty’ to clarify why they did not enrol their children in (many) organised activities. Parents who had taken their children out of an activity cited difficulties in coordinating the children’s activities with other things that needed to be done. Most importantly, they said that they wanted to spend more time with the family.

Ulrika, for example, a 42-year-old mother of two children (aged 5 and 8 years) who worked as a personal assistant, discussed this issue when explaining why she had reduced her children’s activities:

Interviewer: Do you find time for activities and such in the evenings?

Ulrika: No, we had that before; we have struggled with it but realised that it’s better to downsize and just … we prioritise being together. That’s … what we feel is best for us and most important. So that’s why we don’t prioritise my salary, for example. It’s mediocre. So no. We try to stay at home and be together and try to have good moments. (Ulrika, working-class)

Eva also talked about the importance of ‘family time’ (Daly 2001).³ She did not want to spend every weekend ‘cheering on that football field’. She preferred to spend time with the family. While it is possible that the emphasis on family time was seen as a legitimate way to justify non-enrolment in extracurricular activities, Eva pointed to conditions in working life. She was a 35-year-old mother of four children (the oldest 9 and 6 years old) who was previously employed as a nurse but, at the time of the interview, was studying to specialise as a midwife. One reason for why Eva wanted one of her children to quit dancing lessons was her present lack of control over her working hours.

We felt that we don’t have time for another activity in the evening since I’m often away in the evenings and can’t control my schedule. When I worked as a nurse, I did my own schedule. I was then able to plan so that I could always work dayshift on Thursdays, for example, when there was dance. But now I have to follow my tutor’s schedule, and I’m much more constrained. So then, we felt that we should try to avoid driving in the evenings. (Eva, middle class)

To the best of our knowledge, the importance of feelings of time poverty for the decision to reduce children’s participation in extracurricular activities has not been discussed in previous research. One reason that this issue arose in our study might be that the families in our sample were all dual-earner families or employed single parents (although a few were on parental leave or unemployed). When they worked, their children spent their days in licensed childcare or school. Organised activities thus had to take place in the evenings and on weekends. There was no ‘housewife’ to drive children to different activities during the day (cf. Hays 1996); rather, the interviews revealed that fathers wanted to take an equal part in the children’s activities. However, although the fathers were seemingly equally engaged in the children’s activities, families struggled to find enough time.

6. Discussion

Allowing children to participate in extracurricular activities was part of most of the participating parents’ childrearing ideals. They assumed that engaging in such activities helped children develop useful abilities and skills. Most importantly, they assumed that this participation would foster a healthy lifestyle. These results resonate with Nordic research, which suggests that parents expect that the child’s engagement in sports will both foster a healthy life and cultivate the child. For example, a Finnish study found that parents, regardless of position in class and gender hierarchies, hoped that their children’s participation in organised activities would help them becoming ‘decent citizens’ who respect other people and have good manners (Berg and Pertola 2015: 37, 40). Similar to this, Norwegian research suggests that parents across social classes see organised sports not only as an important part of children’s everyday life activities, but also as an arena for the cultivation of the self. Like the Swedish families in our study, they furthermore emphasised that engaging in activities should also be fun for the child (Stefansen et al. 2016: 4, 8–9; cf. Chin and Phillips 2004). Another Norwegian study of children’s influence on whether to participate in an activity, or not, actually concluded that the child’s initiative was ‘almost sacred’ (Stefansen and Aarseth 2011). The parents felt ‘obliged to follow’ anything that seemed to interest their child. Although the parents in our study also appeared to listen to the desires and wishes of their children, the term ‘sacred’ might be a stretch as the Swedish parents also encouraged their children to participate in certain activities. In line with Vincent and Ball’s (2007) study, parents tended to view activities as fun with an additional value.

The fact that both the middle-class parents and a group of working-class parents shared similar views about engaging in organised activities highlights the importance of understanding concerted cultivation within general sociocultural development. The ways in which the many parents reasoned about activities indicate that intensive parenting (Hays 1996) and concerted cultivation (Lareau 2011) are far-reaching cultural ideals that influence the overall parenting culture in Sweden (cf. Forsberg 2009). Our findings thus suggest that Swedish parenting culture and childrearing ideals cross class boundaries (cf. Berg and Pertola 2015; Stefansen et al. 2016). It is possible that preschools play a role in shaping these perspectives among parents. This interpretation is substantiated by comparative research indicating that universal, high-quality childcare has an equalising effect (Esping-Andersen 2002, 2016; Meagher and Szebehely 2012). As mentioned earlier, Swedish children spend most of their weekdays in childcare. Both parents and children are thus exposed to parental and childhood ideals communicated by highly educated preschool teachers.

Furthermore, we suggest that this parenting culture is related not only to strategic enrichment and the enhancement of possibilities but also to supervision and control (Jenks 2005: 73–87; Holloway and Pimplott-Wilson 2014; Mose 2016). That is, extracurricular activities may be a way to ensure that children spend their time in an environment supervised by adults. In this way, parents determine where their children spend their time, what they are doing and with whom they are doing it (cf. Vincent and Maxwell 2016; Mose 2016: 33). Concerns about the health of the child were also prevalent among both working-class families and middle-class families. Parents seemed to find it particularly important to ensure that their children adopted a healthy lifestyle.

The enrolment of children in extracurricular activities also aligns with other general developments, such as increasing ‘responsibilisation’, or the belief that parents are ‘responsible for generating their children’s biographies through the development of the children’s intellectual, social, cultural physical and emotional skills’ (Vincent and Maxwell 2016: 273). Although they rarely explicitly said as much, the participants in our study appeared to feel that it was their responsibility to ensure that their children acquired essential life skills, such as social and physical skills. General processes of responsibilisation might also partially explain the ambivalence displayed by some of the working-class parents. Although they did not find engagement in extracurricular activities to be very important, it is possible that one reason they enrolled their children in such activities was that they felt that otherwise, they would not be looked upon as responsible parents (even by themselves).

As clarified earlier, we also identified class differences in parents’ reasoning. In comparison to the working-class parents, the middle-class parents tended to put more emphasis on the importance of extracurricular activities. The middle-class children also seemed to be engaged in more activities, a result that accords with previous research (Lareau 2002; Chin and Phillips 2004; Dumais 2006; Vincent and Ball 2007; Lleras 2008; Fredericks and Eccles 2010; Snellman et al. 2015). The working-class parents were less future-oriented, had a comparatively cooler approach to organised activities (cf. Stefansen et al. 2016), or even found them unimportant. The perhaps most influential attempt to explain such differences between middle-class and working-class parents’ reasoning is that they are rooted in opposing class-based cultural logics and understandings (Lareau 2002, 2011). This study yields no simple support for or rejection of this conclusion. On the one hand, almost all middle-class parents and the majority of working-class parents reasoned in similar ways in terms of organised activities. They enacted concerted cultivation beliefs and reasoned in accordance with this logic. On the other hand, one group of parents valued activities differently than the majority did. They simply did not believe that activities were important, and they believed that it was better for children to spend time with the family and play more freely. The parents in this group belonged to the working-class. How can the two different orientation towards extracurricular activities among the working-class parents be understood?

It is important to note that ‘middle-class’ and ‘working-class’ are not dichotomous concepts (Vincent et al. 2008a; Irwin and Elley 2011). Several studies have found similarities in values and reasoning about extracurricular activities across social class boundaries (Chin and Phillips 2004; Irwin and Elley 2011; Bennet et al. 2012; Holloway and Pimlott-Wilson 2014; Berg and Peltola 2015; Stefansen et al. 2016). Most often, differences between and within classes are explained by structural factors and socio-economic circumstances. Differences in access to a social support network and labour market participation might thus help to explain the differences that we found. This suggestion is supported by Vincent, Ball, and Braun’s study (2008b) in Britain, which found that two working-class fractions emanated from differences in access to social capital and the nature of engagement with the labour market. Social class background (i.e. the interviewed parents’ own class upbringing) might also be significant. To explore the importance of social support networks, labour market participation and social background in explaining the differences in the working-class parents’ orientations is, however, outside the scope of this article.

Compared to some international research, family income does not seem to explain the differences between parents’ engagement in organised activities (cf. Lareau 2002; Chin and Phillips 2004; Irwin and Elley 2011; Bennet et al. 2012; Holloway and Pimplott-Wilson 2014; Siraj and Mayo 2014). Few parents in this study referred to limited economic resources when discussing organised activities. The kinds of activities were also similar. Working-class children did not practice the most expensive activities, but these activities were also not common among middle-class families. As stated above, one explanation may be that the costs of extracurricular activities are comparatively low in Sweden, although they may still constitute a substantial expense for low-income families. It is also possible that financial reasons were significant in the group of working-class parents who did not find extracurricular activities important, although they did not explicitly say so.

We have suggested that ‘time poverty’, or lack of control over working hours, may partly explain differences in parents’ engagement. When parents compare drawbacks, a sense of time poverty may be more urgent than financial poverty, even among low-income families. It was mentioned as a main reason for not engaging in extracurricular activities or for reducing the number of activities. The parents described difficulties in combining work schedules and housework with children’s organised activities (preparing for the activities, driving the children, participating during activities). They experienced a substantial time crunch. This is consistent with research showing that child-centred parenthood tends to result in a sense of time pressure (Forsberg 2009: 30, see also Dunn et al. 2003; Chin and Phillips 2004; Lareau and Weineger 2008; Wheeler 2014). Like money, time is unequally distributed in Sweden. Middle-class parents generally have more control over their time. To cite Wheeler (2014: 216), they have ‘the greatest scope to exercise time sovereignty’ as they have the potential for time and spatial flexibility and to set their own working schedule and work office hours much more than working-class parents do (Chin and Phillips 2004; Hill et al. 2008; Peters et al. 2009; Reay 2010; Moen et al. 2013; Wheeler 2014). This might be an important factor in explaining the differences between working-class and middle-class parents’ enrolment of their children in extracurricular activities, although further research is needed on this subject.

To conclude, our findings reveal striking similarities between working-class and middle-class parents’ views of extracurricular activities, although the middle-class parents were more homogeneous in this sense. This overlap indicates that concerted cultivation is a parenting style that influences the overall parenting culture in Sweden. The results also suggest, however, that middle-class parents regard extracurricular activities as more important than working-class parents and that working-class parents are not uniform with regard to parenting ideals and practices. Another finding is that access to economic resources did not seem to be important in explaining the number of extracurricular activities in which children participate. Instead, a lack of time was a main reason mentioned for not engaging in extracurricular activities or for reducing the number of activities.

We, finally, want to call attention to some of the limitations of this study. First, it should be noted that extracurricular activities for children are only a small part of the general childrearing ideals in society. The results of this study must thus be understood in relation to the larger class differences in tendencies to feel, reason, and act in certain ways. Extracurricular activities are only one piece of a much larger puzzle. Furthermore, the differences between middle-class and working-class families with respect to the number of extracurricular activities should not be exaggerated in such a small data set. Another limitation of this study is the fact that the design of this study did not allow us to explore how parents with different ethnic background reason about engaging their children in extracurricular activities.

Acknowledgements

This paper draws on a study about parenting practices in Sweden. We would also like to thank the editors of this special issue and the two anonymous reviewers for constructive suggestions on an earlier version of this manuscript.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

ORCID

Daniel Sjödin http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6522-6025

Notes on contributors

Daniel Sjödin is holding a post-doc research position. He is situated at the School of Humanities, Education and Social Sciences, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden.

Christine Roman is a Professor of Sociology. He is situated at the School of Humanities, Education and Social Sciences, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden.

Additional information

Funding

We are grateful to the Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Life and Welfare (Forte) [Forskningsrådet om Hälsa, Arbetsliv och Välfärd] for funding this study [grant number 2013-0263].

Notes

1 ‘Extracurricular activities’ and ‘organized activities’ are used interchangeably in the following text.

2 The six single-parent families are categorised according to the participant’s level of education, income, and occupation.

3 According to Kerry Daly (2001: 293), ‘family time’ is a problematic, ideological concept shaped by ‘Western ideals of family togetherness, positive engagement and child-centeredness’. His research revealed large discordance between the expectations and experiences of family time. While parents tended to think that they never had enough family time, in reality much of the time spent together was characterized by obligation, demand, and conflict (Daly 2001: 289).