Marxist Views of Education? Flashcards
What are Marxists’ views of education?
Marxists take a negative view of education, arguing that schools maintain social class inequalities in society.
The education system acts as a means of socialising children into their social class position, ensuring that students accept and do not challenge Capitalism (a society based on private property, which is divided into social classes). Schools help prepare working class children for boring, repetitive labour (e.g. factory work, cleaning, bin men),
while middle class children are encouraged to aim for higher levels of education and professional jobs (e.g. lawyers, accountants, doctors). So, the working classes stay poor and disadvantaged, whilst the middle classes do well.
What did Bowles and Gintis propose?
Bowles and Gintis argue that the education system maintains Capitalism in three ways: the myth of meritocracy,
the hidden curriculum and the correspondence principle.
What is the myth of meritocracy?
Schools make working class students believe that education is meritocratic.
But, in reality, the education system is not fair and students do not have equal
chances. Achievement is determined by a student’s social class background,
not their effort or ability. Working class students are more likely to fail or get poor
exam results because they are disadvantaged (e.g. cannot afford private tutors or
a quiet study space at home). But, schools want working class students to think
education is fair and meritocratic, so that they don’t challenge Capitalism.
Thus reproducing social class inequalities (the poor stay poor, the rich stay rich).
What is the hidden curriculum?
The hidden curriculum refers to everything that is taught informally and is not part of the
formal curriculum. In other words, everything students learn that is not taught in lessons
such as making friends, dealing with boring lessons, being obedient. Bowles and Gintis argue
that the hidden curriculum helps to prepare working class students for low paid, boring,
low status jobs.
What is the correspondence principle?
This is the idea that schools mirror the world of work. Bowles and Gintis argue that school is simply preparing students for their future roles at work. Working class children are prepared for their future roles in low paid, low status jobs, while middle class children are prepared for high status, high paid jobs.
What did Bourdieu propose?
Bourdieu argues that the main role of education is to reproduce the class structure. Bourdieu believes that each social class has a habitus – its own cultural framework and set of ideas, which influences their tastes and choices. The dominant class (the middle class) has the power to impose (or force) its own habitus in the education system.
So what counts as educational knowledge is not the culture of society as a whole (what functionalists’ think),
but that of the middle class. Because the school has a middle class habitus, this gives middle class pupils an advantage, as they have been socialised at home into middle class tastes, ideas and values. Middle class students gain status and recognition from the school, which Bourdieu calls ‘symbolic capital’. Whilst, working class habitus is seen as inferior – their tastes (e.g. in clothes, accent) are deemed to be tasteless and worthless. Working class students’ experience ‘symbolic violence’ – their culture is devalued and they’re forced to learn middle class knowledge and values. They feel uncomfortable at school and believe education is not for them. Bourdieu claims that symbolic violence reproduces the class structure by keeping the working class ‘in their place’
What did Althusser propose?
Althusser argues that education is part of the ideological state apparatus (an institution which spreads ruling class beliefs, ideas and values). Schools persuade students to accept Capitalist values and beliefs such as being rewarded for hard work and obeying authority
Schools keep working class students in a state of false class consciousness (they do not know they are exploited workers). Working class students are brainwashed into thinking Capitalist society is fair and meritocratic.
What did Willis propose?
Willis is a Neo-Marxist and he argues that students are not simply brainwashed into
being obedient workers – some students rebel. Willis studied 12 working class boys
(the lads) who formed an anti-school subculture (values go against the school’s
values). The lads’ rejected school, their behaviour included messing about in lessons, not doing homework and truanting.
A03 of Marxism
- Althusser’s ideas are too deterministic – students are not passive, many students have little regard for teachers’ authority and reject the teachers’ values. Students do break the rules and test the boundaries.
A03 (FUNCTIONALIST)
- Functionalists would disagree with the view that schooling is negative, they argue that the values and beliefs taught in schools are positive, benefitting all students, regardless of their social class background. Values such as working hard and competition support the smooth running of society.
- Functionalists disagree with Bowles and Gintis, arguing that the education system IS meritocratic and all students have an equal chance of success. The grades a student achieves are down to how hard they work. There is equality of opportunity.
A03 (POSTMODERNIST)
- Postmodernists argue that the Marxist view of education churning out mindless, obedient workers is out-dated because we now live in a post-modern society where we work at high levels on more specialised goods, therefore students need a range of skills. Postmodernists argue that education reproduces diversity, not inequality.
A03 (FEMINISM)
- Feminists argue that education does not reproduce Capitalism, but patriarchal ideology (male-dominance). For example, the majority of teachers are female, but most Head Teachers are male, which encourages the idea that men are the people in charge.
