Studied by 3 people
Emile Durkheim (1981)
Education’s major function is transmission of society’s norms and values
School is a miniature society, primes children for society’s rules; joins masses of students together into unified whole (social solidarity)
Education teaches the skills needed in future occupations, specialised division of labour increasingly relies on it
Hargreaves (1982)
(Durkheim Crit) Schools emphasise individual competition rather than encouraging cooperation and social solidarity
Talcott Parsons (1951)
Schools is the bridge between the family and the society, takes on main socialising function after primary socialisation in the family.
Shared functionalist view that value consensus is essential for society to function effectively
Schools in American societies introduce two major values: achievement and equality of opportunity
Education system is an important mechanism for the selection of an individual for their future role in society.
→ school major mechanism for role allocation
Parsons Crit (one of many)
fails to consider the possibility that values transmitted by the education system benefit a ruling minority rather than all of society
are schools really meritocratic?
Davis and Moore (1967)
identified education as a means of role allocation, linking it more directly to a system of social stratification
social stratification
mechanism for ensuring the most talented and able members of society are allocated to functionally important positions in society
Davis and Moore Crit
does the education system really grade people in terms of ability?
there is widespread evidence that social stratification is a cause, rather than effect, of differential achievement
false class consciousness
a distorted picture of society that blinds the subject class to their exploitation and justifies and legitimates the position of the ruling class
Bowles and Gintis (1976)
The role of education in capitalist societies is reproducing labour power over time.
Achieved through the hidden curriculum and the forms of consciousness, interpersonal behaviour, and personality it fosters in it’s students.
Reject the view that rewards in the education system are based on merit
Educational and occupational attainment is related to family background rather than talent
Education provides the legitimation of pre-existing economic disparities
Put forth the correspondence theory
correspondence theory (Bowles and Gintis)
there is a close correspondence between the structure of the workplace and the structure of the education system.
hierarchy
rewards and sanctions
passive and docile workers/students
motivation (be externally motivated rather than intrinsically)
fragmentation of knowledge
Bowles and Gintis Crit
argument is too deterministic, sees education as determined only by the economy; ignores the influence of other agencies
ignores resistance in schools - students have little respect for school rules or teacher’s authority (Willis’ Lads)
Henry Giroux (1984)
(B&G Crit)
schools can be seen as sites of ideological struggle - with clashes based on conflicting views occurring within and between various groups
Louis Althusser (1972)
in order for the capitalist class to survive and prosper, the reproduction of labour power is essential (guess who’s job it is?)
reproduction involves two processes:
reproduction of skills necessary for an efficient labour force
reproduction of ruling-class ideology and the socialisation of workers in terms of this ideology
no class can hold power simply by force, ideological control is more effective
ISAs transmit ruling class ideology and cause false class consciousness
Althusser Crit
provides little evidence to support his views
criticised for picturing members of society as ‘cultural dopes,’ passively accepting their positions and failing to question dominant ideology
no indication of any opposition or resistance to ruling class (bruh what is this point)
→ Elliot (2009) there is ‘no sense of the politics of ideological struggle’ (well there we go)
Paul Willis (1997)
ethnographic study of a boys’ school in England, 1970s
found schools were not as successful in producing docile workers as B&G claimed
working class lads had their own counter-school culture that opposed the values that schools promoted
lads felt superior to their teachers and conformist classmates
attached little or no value to academic work
had no interest in gaining qualifications
eager to leave school ASAP and looked forward to their first full-time jobs
saw their future work as tough, hard and manly, while mental work was seen as effeminate (sissy)
their construction of masculinity was both offensive and defensive
gave power to their resistance
superiority over those school defined as successful
self-respect where teachers saw them as failures
counter-school culture followed them into their jobs, becoming shop-floor culture
Paul Willis Plot Twist
Both subcultures were ways of coping with tedium and oppression
The lads neither accepted authority, neither were they obedient and docile. B&G were wrong.
All hope is lost.
Marx lays down his sword
…
A cry sounds from the enemy’s side.
Alas! What’s this?
Paul Willis has stabbed Talcott Parsons in the back!
Willis gives Durkheim a fist in the face!
Willis runs through the field with a whimsy in his step, skipping over bloodied bodies as if they are nothing more than grasses.
Willis rears up his head and roars
“It was the lads very own REJECTION of school that made them suitable for male unskilled or semi-skilled manual work! Meritocracy IS a myth! The lads actively created their own subculture, yes - but it led them to look for manual jobs! School fucking reproduced inequality ANYWAY!!!”
Madeleine Arnot (2014)
(Descendant of House Willis, noble Knight. She has surrendered her sword though.)
Willis’ study has greater, not less relevance, in the current school climate
schools are increasingly exam-driven, competitive and pressured
de-industrialisation of Western society/decrease in manual jobs have led to increasing uncertainty about occupational futures
These factors might make working-class masculinity and resistance to schools more relevant today
Michael Ward (2015)
study of young South Welsh men shows that working class culture has remained the same despite the disappearance of many traditional working class jobs (Willis beats the temporal validity allegations)
Glenn Rikowski
educational services operating within markets are being transformed into commodities
globalisation is essentially capitalist globalisation; education is becoming a global commodity
education services will be progressively commercialised, privatised and capitalised
he remains optimistic about the possibility of opposing the influence of global capitalism on education
believes teachers can prevent the smooth flow of labour production
critics argue that govt. controls education and will do so for the forseeable future
Pierre Bourdieu (1986)
the main role of education is cultural reproduction
this refers to the reproduction of the culture of dominant classes, rather than society as a whole, contrary to what Durkheim believed
economic, social, symbolic and cultural capital are the main resources that determine people’s position in a society
cultural capital is the most important
he relates success or failure in education system to the distribution of cultural capital between social classes
Bourdieu Evaluation
overly rigid structure of society which constrains behaviour
little room for creativity, human agency, resistance
Elliot (2009) people are represented as creatures of the social system
marxists argued he neglected the economy
his descriptions lacked detail and precision
Sullivan (2001) failed to spell out how cultural capital is transformed into educational qualifications + neglects individual agency and consciousness
Social democratic views
sometimes similar to functionalism, sees education as a means of providing equality of opportunity and essential for economic growth
but inequalities in society prevent both of these things
the class system stands in the way of equality of opportunity, which is essential for meritocracy
two ways societies can become more meritocratic:
changing the education system to give all students equal chances
changing the class system and reducing the inequalities that divide society
A.H. Halsey
inequalities produced by the free market prevent equality of opportunity
education has a major role to play in economic growth in advanced industrial societies, where demand for professional and managerial workers is high
Eval. of social democrat theory
give too much importance to changing the education system as a means of reducing inequality of opportunity - educational reforms in Britain have not appeared to help class differences in attainment
feminists say schools do not run on meritocratic principles, gender inequalities exist
does education really help economic growth? school curriculum does not meet employer’s requirements
Bernstein (1971) S.D. Crit
education cannot compensate for society
Alison Wolf (2002) S.D. Crit
among the most successful economies, there is no clear link between spending on education and economic growth
New Right views
sees competition as the key to efficiency and economic growth
competition only works in a free market
competition offers choice to consumers
state-owned monopolies - such as education - should be privatised
education is the key to economic growth
raising standards in education will raise standards of living
schools, colleges and universities should compete with each other in the free market for students
public money from the state will follow the choices of students and parents so the top/most efficient universities will keep running
information about school standards should be widely available
Eleanor Gurney (2017)
argues that unless efforts are made to address the effects of children from relatively privileged families leaving the state sector, the pro-market approach might entrench rather than challenge the ‘reproduction of social inequalities through education’
argues that one potential consequence of this is greater social segregation
found that parental identity played an important role in school choices - women able to exercise some control over decision-making
Eval. of New Right
differences in parents knowledge and financial resources; would they really have equal choice
competition and choice only improve standards by a small amount
evidence suggests market approaches will lead to greater inequalities
consumer choice can result in provider choice, especially if there is limited seating
may lead to creaming
marketisation leads to a narrow view of it as a means to an end
Levin and Belfield
competition and choice only improve educational standards by a small amount
market approaches will lead to higher inequalities; the children of high income parents will gain the most
increases the attainment gap
Coffield and Williamson
schools have been turned into ‘exam factories’
exam results have become a measure of success for students, teachers and schools
teachers ‘teach to test’ and students are ‘mark hungry and obsessed by exams’
Hugh Lader et al. (2006)
education is not ‘a servant of the economy’
little room for creativity, critical thinking, questioning and self-awareness in New Right policy
