Critical theory approach to education

McLeod's chapter on education again outlined the differences between the Hangers and Brothers.  for the most part, I saw that these differences, again, were most dramatic in how each group approached their future.  For the Hangers, little hope is given to their future and a more realistic approach to school is taken.  So, because the hangers realize that even with a high school diploma or good marks in school,  advancing out of poverty is still highly unlikely, so effort in school makes little difference.  The brothers on the other hand are hopeful that their futures will bring them out of poverty.  this hope can be accredited to their more intact family structures and the presence of male role models.  The brothers therefore work earnestly in school, despite being able to make high marks.  If LHS took a critical theory approach to education ( proponents of this theory see that schools are institutions set forth by the middle class and meant to keep a group of people oppressed) and worked to help the oppressed rise rather than inflicting middle class norms on the lower class, the hangers might be more likely to stay in school because it is a more realistic approach to education.