role of education in society Flashcards
Functionalist perspective: Durkheim
Society needs a sense of solidarity, must feel a part of a ‘single body’. It transmitted society’s culture, shared beliefs and values from one generation to the next. Teaching of a country’s history instils in children a sense of shared heritage and commitment. Acts as ‘society in miniature’, preparing us for life in wider society, both in school and work we cooperate with people, nor family or friends, according to impersonal rules. Each must perform its necessary specialist role in social division of labour.
Functionalist perspective: Parsons and meritocracy
Sees school as ‘focal socializing agency’ in modern society, acting as a bridge between family and wider society; needed because family and society operate on different principles. The family is judged by particular standards, a childs status is ascribed. Both school and wider society judge us for same universalistic and impersonal standards, each student is judges against the same standards. School prepares us to move from family to wider society because school and society are both based on meritocratic principles: everyone is given an equal opportunity.
Functionalist perspective: Davis and Moore, role allocation
Schools also perform the function of selecting and allocating pupils to their future work roles, by assessing individuals aptitudes and abilities, schools match to job best suited to. Inequality is necessary to ensure most important roles in society are filled by most talented people, otherwise it would be dangerous and inefficient. Encourages people to compete for jobs. Education acts as a proving ground for ability.
Functionalist perspective: Blau and Duncan, human capital
A modern economy depends on prosperity on using its ‘human capital’, workers skills. A meritocratic system does this best.
Evaluation of functionalist perspective
Education system does not teach specialised skills adequately as Durkheim claims (high quality apprenticeships are rare and up to 1/3 of 16-19 year old’s on courses, do not lead to higher education or good jobs). There is lots of evidence that equal opportunity in education does not exist (class diff). Tumin criticises D&M for making a circular argument (what jobs are important?). Marxists argue it only transmits the ideology of a minority. Functionalists have an ‘over-socialised view’ as mere puppets of society, wrongly assumes everyone is passive (Wrong).
The New Right perspective
Conservative politics view, belief that the state cannot meet peoples needs and people are best left to meet own needs in free market. Similarities between F and NR: both believe some people are naturally more talented than others, both favour an education system run on meritocratic principles of open competition, both believe education should socialise shared values and national identity. New right believe they are not achieving these goals, because it is run by the state. Education system takes a ‘one size fits all’ approach, imposing uniformity and disregarding local needs (have no say). State is unresponsive and inefficient. Solution is marketisation of education.
The New Right perspective: Chubb and Moe, consumer choice
State-run education in US has failed because it has not created equal opportunity, inefficient in produced pupils with skills needed for economy and private schools deliver higher quality education (answerable to paying consumers). Children from low-income families do 5% better in private schools, than state schools. Call for introduction of market system that puts control in the hands of consumers, shaping schools to own needs. Schools should compete to attract ‘customers’, like private sector.
The New Right perspective: 2 roles for the state
The state should impose a framework on schools within which they have to compete, publishing Ofsted inspection reports and league tables, gives parents information. The state should ensure schools transmit a shared culture by imposing a single national curriculum, seeks to guarantee that schools socialise pupils into single cultural heritage. Education should affirm national identity, opposing multicultural education.
Evaluation of the New Right perspective
Competition between schools benefits the middle class, who uses cultural and economic capital to gain access to more desirable schools (Gewirtz and Ball). Critics argue real cause of low educational standards is not state control but social inequality and inadequate funding of state schools. Contradiction between New Rights support for parental choice on one hand and state imposing a compulsory national curriculum. Marxists argue state doesn’t impose national culture, but instead a dominant minority ruling class, that devalues wc and ethnic minorities.
Marxist perspective: Althusser and the ideological state apparatus
State helps capitalist ruling class maintain their dominant position. The repressive state apparatuses, maintains rule of the bourgeoisie by force of threats (police, courts and physical coercion). The ideological state apparatuses, maintains rule of bourgeoisie by peoples ideas, values and beliefs (media, religion and education). The education system reproduces class inequality by transmitting it from generation to generation, by failing each successive generation of wc pupils. Education legitimises class inequality, producing ideologies that disguise its true cause. To accept inequality is inevitable.
Marxist perspective: Bowles and Gintis, schooling in capitalist America
Capitalism requires a workforce with the kinds of attitudes, behavior and personality-type suited to their role as alienated and exploited workers willing to accept low pay, hard work and orders. Role is to reproduce obedient work force. Study of 237 New York high school students, schools reward personality traits of a submissive, compliant worker.
Marxists perspective: correspondence principle and hidden curriculum
Close parallels between schooling and work in capitalist society, both have hierarchies, person up top making decisions and giving orders. School mirrors workplace = schooling takes place in the ‘long shadow of work’, also known as the ‘correspondence principle’. This operates through the hidden curriculum, all ‘lessons’ are learning in school without being directly taught (accepting hierarchy and competition). Prepare students for workforce for capitalism.
Marxists perspective: Cohen, correspondence principle and hidden curriculum
Youth training schemes serve capitalism by teaching young workers not genuine job skills, but rather attitudes and values needed in a subordinate labour force, lowers aspirations so they will accept low paid work.
Marxist perspective: myth of meritocracy, the legitimation of class inequality
Educations system helps prevent the poor from rebelling, by legitimising class inequalities. Its a giant myth-making machine: ‘the myth of meritocracy’, arguing it does not exist. It serves to justify the privileges’ of the higher classes, making it seem they gained their success in open and fair competition at school. It justifies poverty, blames it on the individual rather than capitalism.
Marxist perspective: Willis and learning to labour
His study shows that wc pupils can resist attempts of control: the lads’ counter-culture.
