why should the term 'less educated' be construed as such?

It wasn't that so much as ancient popular beliefs, customs, and traditions, which have survived.... There was always more than an element of that in the work of the antiquarian folklorist who perceived folklore to be the residue of more ancient pre-Christian practise that had (somehow) survived the aeons in the form of folklore. Similar notions abound today - the didactic certainties of the Pagan Community is founded on them (yes - the Maypole is a Phallic Symbol etc.); ask anyone about Ring-a-Roses (even the child in the playground) and they'll likely tell you in no uncertain terms that it dates from the time of the Black Death; ask anyone about The Green Man or Sheela-na-Gig (even the incumbent of the church which they decorate) and they'll tell you about a pagan gods and goddesses. This is a direct legacy the study and interpretation of Folklore that still lingers in the popular imagine, and which is, of course, worthy of folkloric study in itself.

Folklore as an academic discipline (or would-be academic discipline) must exist at an academic remove, thereby in some way to attain a cherished objectivity, however so unlikely it is that such a position might ever be truly attained. So much of this now feeds back, however so convoluted, to the extent that even the house-holder who hangs their sprig of mistletoe above the door at Christmas will tell you about the lurid fertility rites of the Ancient Druids of which this harmless custom is but a residue. And yet how close is folklore to belief? Or yet superstition? What of the spiritual dimension? With what hope in their hearts do wassailers fire off their prize Purdeys into the branches of the apple trees? And who is Karl Popper?