Paper 3 The Role and Function of Education Flashcards
Functionalist view of the Role and Function of Education: 1 Teaches social solidarity and value Consensus (Durkheim)
Durkheim argued that all societies needed to create a sense of social solidarity in their members. Social solidarity creates a fearing of unity and belonging based on shared benefits and values. A value consensus is where everyone has shares the same value. The educational system is encouraged by swaying subjects such as literature, music or religious studies. As they are gaining and developing broad knowledge of their rights and responsibilities and the knowledge of the political system which they can teach other generations.
2 Provisions of specialist skills for the workplace (Durkheim)
it instills values, but also prepares young people for the world of work in industrial societies. In pre-industrial societies children typically learned skills from their parents or other family members as they would follow the same occupations; however in industrial skill (provided by schools) are needed (not taught by parents).
Secondary socialisation - (Universalistic Values & a shared culture are reinforced) (Parsons)
Education is a Bridge between Family and work. In Family Children are treated in terms of paternalistic values, where parents judge them on values to them alone. in wider society individuals are judged by university values, which apply to everyone - schools help with jobs, and the transition, through exams. etc
Education reinforces a ‘shared national culture’ - Equality of opportunity belief that everyone has an equal chance of success, schools reject this by encouraging all pupils to succeed, all should be treated equally.
Role Allocation - selecting and grading pupils for their future role in society, schools operate on principle of meritocracy by rewarding hard workers. Employers can then identity these individuals for best choice for job.
It allocates roles ready for the workplace (based on functional importance and meritocracy) Davis and Moore
Education performs role allocation and sifts, sorts and grades people in terms of ability, which is rewarded in exam success.
Stratification is necessary - it divides society’s occupations into levels of functional importance. Those with the most ability are then rewarded in a meritocratic society in terms of e comic rewards to ensure the best people fill the most.
The new right approach - role 1 = improve standards through reducing state involvement and increasing parentocracy (Chubb and moe)
Claimed that American schools failed disadvantaged groups, did not produce skills in pupils that would benefit the economy, and that private schools better had a quality education than state. So they too promoted the same solution of creating a parentocracy. They hypothetically suggested the idea of handing out parental education vouchers to spend on a school of their choice, and thus remove automatic funding from the state. Therefore the schools need the vouchers as their source of funding, and making schools responsive to pupils and parents - ensuring higher quality education.
The new right approach - role 1 = improve standards through reducing state involvement and increasing parentocracy (policy to support - The Education Reform Act 1988)
Can be seen to reflect many of the New Right ideals of marketising education and raising standards through introducing league tables based on attainment, and the creation of Ofsted - a state-sanctioned quality assurance body.
The new right approach - role 2 = promote traditional conservative values (policy to support - Section 28 of Local Government Act 1988)
Prohibited the “promotion of homosexuality” by local authorities (therefore schools). The act declared that a school could not intentionally promote homosexuality or publish material with the intention of promoting homosexuality, or promote the teaching in any school of the acceptability of homosexuality as a family relationship. This was in place until 2000.
The new right approach - role 3 = encourage values of competition and meritocracy (Murray)
Charles Murray’s (2008) Real Education, argued that education in the US had become too ‘romantic’, and has neglected the simple realities of pupils’ ability - essentially not everyone is as smart as each other. In an attempt to make education more fair and egalitarian, education has lost its sense of meritocracy and is therefore failing those who are most gifted. In assuming that less intellectually gifted students could achieve the same outcomes as those who are, those who are will suffer. He argued that education asks “too much from students at the bottom of the intellectual pile, asks the wrong things from those in the middle, and asks too little from those at the top.” This essentially culminates in too many people going to university, and therefore devaluing higher education degrees. This is very bad, as he feels society is fundamentally dependent on how well educated the academically gifted are. He promotes that education should essentially be tougher and more challenging, promote meritocracy, and admit that even though many will not be successful in education, they can still have value in society - just in less skilled vocations.
The new right approach - role 4 = encourage vocational skills (policy to support - new vocationalism)
The introduction of Youth Training Schemes, NVQs and GNVQs (a range of schemes and qualifications aimed at NEETS to gain skills and employment
Marxism - role 1 = reproduce class inequality (willis)
‘lads’ formed a distinctive “counter-school sub-cultural grouping” characterised by opposition to the values and norms perpetuated throughout the school. They showed little interest in academic work, preferring instead to amuse themselves as best they could through various forms of deviant behaviour in which ‘having a laff’ became the main objective of the school day. The counter school subculture helped prepare them for the boredom and monotony of the work they were to do later on. Their peer group was anti-school and they were reproducing their working class position by not valuing education and playing up in class.
Marxism - role 1 = reproduce class inequality (bourdieu)
Cultural capital reproduces class inequality by constructing a class apartheid between the middle and working class students. It is the middle class that possess more cultural capital that is valued by middle class institutions such as the education system, thus disadvantaging other social groups.
Marxism - role 2 = legitimate class inequality through ideology (althusser)
Believes that education acts as an ideological state apparatus - a ‘tool’ used by the state or ‘government’ to spread an ideology or their ‘ideas’. It reproduces class inequalities by teaching ruling class values. Ideology is transmitted through the hidden curriculum - this creates a false class consciousness where the WC accept failure and inequality. E.g education teaches that society is meritocratic, but Marxists would argue that this is a myth as no matter how hard you work WC cannot achieve social mobility
Marxism - role 3 = teach exploitable skills for the capitalist workplace (Bowles and Gintis)
There is a close correspondence between the social relationships in the classroom and those in the workplace. Work is essential for capitalists as it aids social reproduction. It means they are appropriately schooled to accept their roles in capitalist society. Education legitimises social inequality by broadcasting the myth that it offers everyone an equal chance (meritocracy is a myth). Compulsory education is so long as it takes time to get children used to accepting boredom and doing as they’re told. Also because it helps capitalists to have more skilled workers than there are suitable jobs available.
The social democratic approach - role 1 = equality of opportunity for all (Halsey)
Believed that middle class children were more likely to get places in remaining grammar schools. Thought that a new system should be implemented to provide greater equality of opportunity eg. comprehensives introduced in the 1960s to replace the tripartite system which was seen to disadvantage working class students.
The social democratic approach - role 1 = equality of opportunity for all (policy to support - Educational Maintenance allowance 2004)
In order to encourage students to stay in education and get higher qualifications than GCSE’s, the labour government launched a financial scheme. Students aged between 16-19 whose parents had a certain lower level of taxable income would receive a maximum of £30 a week if they met their guided learning hours.
