EDUCATION

1.1 CONSENSUS THEORIES OF EDUCATION

Functionalists suggest that education has 3 main functions

Secondary socialisation
Role allocation
Providing skills for the economy

Durkheim and education

education provides secondary socialisation -> which passes on universal norms and values (universalistic vs particularistic)
This creates a value consensus = a shared set of norms and values
So this creates social solidarity + cohesion

The secondary socialisation role is done by…

instilling social solidarity - learning history (overt curriculum) and learning to get on/ collaborate with others (hidden curriculum)
Teaching social rules - limiting deviance through learning punishment and self-discipline (hidden curriculum)
Teaching specialist skills - learning particular things depending on their future role

Evaluation - Durkheim

Marxists argued the ruling class use education to spread the dominant ideology. Leading to false class consciousness and legitimacy of authority so people don’t challenge/ question the structure of society
Postmodernists argued it is outdated. Since society is so diverse there can no longer be a value consensus. Also work is no longer based around assembly lines so we skills are more likely taught through on-the-job training
Hargreaves argued that education does not encourage collaboration but encourages individualism and competition (sees collaboration as cheating or copying)

Parsons and education

education facilitates role allocation, acting as a neutral sieve (sifting and sorting people)
Education helps society to be meritocratic
Based on the idea of achieved status vs ascribed status

Key terms

Meritocracy = jobs are allocated based on an individuals talent and achievements rather than social status

Achieved status = status earned through efforts and abilities

Ascribed status = status you are born with

Evaluation - parsons

Marxists - myth of meritocracy. Argue that the proletariat is persuaded to believe that the rich and powerful reached their positions through hard work. This leads to a reproduction of inequalities as they develop a false class consciousness as they accept society as fair. Bowles and gintis found success is greatly dependent on class, ethnicity, gender rather than IQ

Davis and Moore

education facilitates meritocracy
For society to function there must be social stratification (this is done in education)
Social stratification = a system of unequal rewards. So the most qualified get the highest paying jobs

Evaluation - Davis and Moore

Marxists - myth of meritocracy. People aren’t graded on ability or effort, success and rewards are due to class. This leads to a reproduction of inequalities
Shown the most qualified doe not get the highest paying jobs. This is seen through high levels of graduate unemployment, footballers vs surgeons and people who get jobs due to family connections

New right views on education

education should not be controlled by the state
Education should be competitive and act as a business. For example: schools try and attract customers/ parents
Believe in parentocracy = putting the parents in control

Chubb and moe

argue that the reason why private schools performed better was because they were answerable to paying customers

Evaluation- new right

Increased competition leads to an increase in negative labels, and more children may be neglected by the schools if they aren’t improving the schools league tables. This leads to the self fulfilling prophecy, so more children fail
The reason private schools perform better is due to other factors such as class DEA. Private schools are also more selective of their students so choose students that will perform well
Contradictory policies - the new right enforced the national curriculum, which is a top-down state interference, which they oppose

1.2 CONFLICT THEORIES OF EDUCATION

Louis Althusser: marxist

education is a part of the ideological state apparatus
Uses the repressive state apparatus (police + army) and the ideological state apparatus to spread the dominant ideology and ensure the proletariat remain in a state of false class consciousness
This perseveres the value consensus that serves the interests of the ruling class, and prevents necessary social change

How is this done

through the formal curriculum - learning British history, that we are always right, and it would be wrong to push for radical social change
Through the hidden curriculum - teaches heirarchy, respect for authority, obeying the rules. This prevents revolution, keeping the proletariat obedient and submissive to the bourgeoise, so they maintain their powerful positions in society

Bowles and gintis: Marxist

identifies a correspondence between school and work
Both involve uniforms, strict time-keeping, heirarchy, rewards and punishments
This prepares students for the capitalist system and prevented rebellion and revolution. ‘Work casts a long shadow over school’

Evaluating Marxist theories

Bowles and gintis research is outdated, as now there are a variety of different jobs that don’t follow the same structure. But this can still be used to criticise education as it proves that education no longer effectively prepares people for work
Some would argue that the education system actually encourages students to critique the education system, getting students involved in democratic structures and to come up with improvements

Paul Willis learning to labour (neomarxist)

studied a group of working class ‘lads’
Found that school prepares young people for the boredom of manual labour by allowing them to develop a distinct set of values which serve as a coping mechanism (e.g ‘having a laff’)
Found these little rebellions prevented a big rebellion from taking place, that could really threaten the capitalist system
But since it’s a neo-Marxist view, it is argued that schools do not deliberately and consciously do this. They accidentally facilitate the capitalist system

Bourdieu

argued that cultural capital is what leads to success
High cultural capital also leads to more positive labels
Also argued that those with the same habitus will relate to each other. So teachers (with middle class habitus) relate more with students who share the same habitus. This can impact labells
Habitus = culture or worldview that is associated with a social class or social group

Bernstein

Argued that different classes had different language codes
Lower classes used a restricted code whereas higher classes used an elaborate code
The education system typically uses an elaborate code, so lower classes may struggle
Those with a restricted code are also more likely to be negatively labelled

Evaluation (neomarxist)

teachers come from a variety of different background so it cannot be argued that all teachers have a middle class habitus. Especially as the rates of working class individuals going to uni is increasing. However it may be argued that they will have ‘adopted’ a middle class habitus by the time they become a teacher
Interactionists would argue that everyone has an agency to respond and that we are not driven by fundamental structures in society. So we should be able to work against the capitalist system if we wished

Feminist views on education

education transmits patriarchal values. Heaton and Lawson argued that this occurs through the hidden curriculum (stereotypes, sports/ gender division, division of labour/ more male headteachers) and the formal curriculum (textbooks)
Liberal feminists - want equality in the education system. Girls now outperform boys in education so the patriarchal system is failing. However Michele stanworth found there’s a higher expectation of boys and they are more likely to be recommended for higher education
Radical feminists - believe the educational system still oppresses women. This is seen by Kat Banyards research - sexually harassment in schools is not treated as seriously as other forms of bullying
Black and intersectional feminists - believe that ethnic minority girls are victims of specific stereotypes and assumptions. E.g assuming Muslim girls have different aspirations

Overall

there has been an improvement for girls in education, mainly due to feminism and new legislation
Sue sharpe found that young girls priorities had changed from family and marriage, to work and education. This is mainly due to the equal pay act and the sex discrimination act

Evaluation of feminists

education is now a female dominated sector and is leading to female success and male underperformance. So this ‘patriarchal system’ is clearly failing
However it is argued there is still a glass ceiling. As there is still a gender pay gap, losing out to males in terms of employment, more likely to take time of for children, more likely to work part time and carry out the majority of household tasks

1.3 DIFFERENTIAL EDUCATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT: SOCIAL CLASS

The statistics

one way to compare achievement is comparing those who are eligible for free school meals
Found attainment for free school meal pupils was 34.8. Attainment of those without free school meals was 49.6
Also those with a higher household income are almost twice as likely to get 5 GCSE’s

The role of IQ

some believe that IQ is inherited so middle class pupils inherit intelligence from their parentds
Research by Jensen and Eyensick found that identical twins had similar IQ, even when living in different households/ environment (nature vs nurture debate)
Douglas also found that ‘average’ middle class pupils were more likely to pass the 11+ exam than ‘average’ working class pupils

External factors

Material factors

Material deprivation= the ability to afford basic resources. This means working class pupils are unable to afford sufficient food, heating, clothing and educational resources.
Poor diet may lead to poor health, which leads to poor attendance and this may negatively impact achievement.
Also pupils may undertake employment alongside their studies, this reduces their time spent on schoolwork and may make them too tired to concentrate at school

Cultural factors

Working class pupils are likely to be culturally deprived, often due to inadequate socialisation.

Sugarman also suggested that working class pupils expect immediate gratification rather than deferred gratification.
Douglas also argued that working class parents are more likely to value achievements outside of education.
Bourdieu suggested that habitus leads to middle class advantage. As their habitus is deemed as superior by other middle class people, including teachers, examiners and employers
Social capital may also play a role. This refers to the networks and relationships a person possesses. This can be useful for pupils if their parents know the teachers, as the teachers will have different expectations of this pupil

Evaluation - out of school factors

policies have been put in place to resolve out of school factors. E.g educational maintenance allowance, pupil premium and free school dinners (for material factors). And sure start (for cultural factors).
Rather than suffering from ‘cultural deprivation’ and not placing a ‘high priority’ on school, it may be that parents need their child’s income to live and cannot afford for them to stay in education (more material factors). So it’s hard to distinguish between material factors and cultural factors.

Internal factors

Labelling

interactionist (Becker)
Suggested that teachers subconsciously label their students and this leads to a self fulfilling prophecy where the pupils live up their labels
Working class pupils are more likely to be negatively labelled

Anti-school subcultures

Paul Willis ‘learning to labour’
Found a subculture of ‘the lads’ had different norms and values. They valued messing about, avoiding work and welcoming poor grades.
These antischool subcultures have little interest in achievement, therefore underperform

Elaborate vs restricted code

Bernstein argued that teachers, textbooks and external examiners use the elaborate code. So the working class pupils struggle and are at a disadvantage since they use the restricted code

Evaluation - in school factors

its hard to distinguish between in school and out of school factors as both impact each other. Diane Reay showed that what happens outside of school impacts what happens inside school, and what happens in school impacts what happens outside of school

1.4 DIFFERENTIAL EDUCATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT: GENDER

Statistics

girls outperform boys
Girls consistently get more As than boys
Girls attainment score was 48.6 and 44 for boys
Girls are more likely to do a levels, boys are more likely to do vocational courses

Out of school factors

Why do girls overachieve

used to be argued that boys brains were biologically better designed for education. Better at rational thought whereas girls are too emotional
Due to the feminist movement there are changes in the status and role of women in society
Sue Sharpe found through interviews that girls priorities had changed from family and marriage to work and education. This is due to changes in the law that were occurring at that time: equal pay act, sex discrimination act.
Biological explanations — girls mature faster than boys so they may do so intellectually too, girls have stronger linguistic abilities

The feminist movement changed attitudes regarding women’s roles in society
The change in the nature of work for women
The change in family life and family structure, the move towards for symmetrical families
Change in media representations of women and girls

Why do boys underachieve

the empowerment of women has led to a crisis of masculinity, suggested by Mac an Ghaill. This is where men are unsure of their role in society as they are no longer needed in the same way as before.
New right sociologists like Charles Murray suggest that the presence of benefits have led to boys having no aspirations beyond unemployment

Moral panic in the media suggest that boys are performing worse, whereas its just that girls are improving faster

Evaluation

Sharpe suggests that women are still oppressed. There is still a gender pay gap, unequal roles in the home and a ‘glass ceiling’.
New right blames the victim. In this case, blaming the boys for not trying hard enough in school, without taking into account other variables

In school factors

Why girls used to underperform (Michelle stanworth)

teachers had lower expectations of girls
Resources such as textbooks and reading schemes reinforced gender stereotypes
Boys dominated the classrooms and stole the teachers attention
Schools encouraged passivity in girls and competitiveness in boys
Intelligence was seen as an unfeminine trait
Schools careers guidance pushing girls towards low-paid or domestic roles
Gender division of subjects

Why do girls overachieve

due to the feminisation of education. More female teachers and role models (suggested by Sewell). Also that education is incorporating skills that girls excel at, for example introducing more coursework. Mitsos and Browne found coursework is better suited for girls as they have better organisation skills
Initiatives introduced to support girls’ education. GIST (girls into science and technology) and WISE (women into science and engineering)
The national curriculum leads to less gender division of subjects, so more girls aspiring to perform well in these subjects. Also league tables mean schools must also focus on improving girls’ achievement in order to move up the league table
Interactions between girls and teachers are educational whereas boys interactions revolve around discipline
Boys are more likely to join anti-school subcultures (Willis’ lads)
Teachers turn a blind eye to some ‘laddish behaviour’, so the boys education is suffering (not just those who are being deviant, but also their peers)

Evaluation

coursework is being removed from GCSE’s and Alevels. Shown during Covid that girls benefit better from centre-assessed grades rather than exams, so the education system is better suited to boys
It implies that boys are falling behind in education, but boys are also improving. They are just doing so at a slower rate to the girls.

1.5 DIFFERENTIAL EDUCATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT: ETHNICITY

The statistics

black pupils underperform
Indian and chinese pupils overperform

Out of school factors

language barriers — suggested that language barriers may lead to underachievement. However driver and Ballard found that Asian children were as good at English in comparison to their classmates by the age of 16. Having language barriers/ accents may lead to internal factors such as negative teacher labels.
Aspects of home life and culture — Archer and Francis suggested that Asian families tend to have higher parental expectations which lead to high achieving children. This can also have negative factors as in African Caribbean households there are high levels of divorce, this can lead to the absence of a male mole model and material deprivation, causing children to underachieve
Class differences. Shown that the underachieving ethnic groups are more likely to recieve free school meals. So factors of social class can be applied to ethnicity

Evaluation

Pakistani communities also have higher parental expectations and close knit families is but tend to underperform. So social class may be a better explanation
Research has shown there is not a significant correlation between having a lone parent and educational underachievement

In school factors

language barriers — accents may lead to teachers negatively labelling students and underestimating them
Curriculum is ethnocentric — centred around white British views, also school holidays are based around the Christian calendar
Institutionally racist — gillborn found that teachers have higher expectations of Chinese and Indian pupils, so they receive positive labels which could lead to a self fulfilling prophecy. Wright argued that schools discriminate against certain ethnicities unintentionally
Subcultures — forming pro/ anti school subcultures based on their ethnicity. E.g black and Asian boys are more likely to form anti-school subcultures. Fuller found that black girls formed an antischool subculture, acting upon a self negating prophecy, proving the teachers wrong. Mirza and Mac an Ghaill were against school as an institution but were not against education itself.

Evaluation

Ethnocentric curriculum could explain some marginalisation but it doesn’t explain why white British pupils are not overachieving.
Theories relating to subcultures fail to explain why these subcultures occur

1.6 RELATIONSHIPS AND PROCESSES

Labelling theory

Becker (Interactionist) - suggests that labels can be positive or negative and can lead to students internalising their label, leading to a self fulfilling prophecy
This is an inside-school factor that could explain differential educational achievement in schools
Students may also reject the label (self negating prophecy)

Rosenthal and Jacobson — pygmalion

gave pupils an IQ test at the beginning and end of the field experiment
Teachers were given these results and told that certain students had great academic potential (these labels were assigned randomly)
There was also a control group of pupils who had not been labelled
Found that those who had been positively labelled improved the most

Ideal pupil

teachers have an image in their mind of the ‘ideal pupil’
This can produce the halo effect - a students behaviour being interpreted differently based on their label

Triage

Gillborn and Youdell suggests that the education system neglects ‘hopeless cases’ and focus on students who are in middle sets/ almost passing GCSE’s
This is linked to the pressure on schools to maintain their position on league tables
This a direct way in which labelling may impact pupils experiences of education and outcomes from education

Evaluating labelling theory

it is very hard to prove the extent to which teachers label and how much pupils are aware if these labels
Interactionist sociologists do not look at structural reasons for why some pupils are labelled
Mirza argued that labelling had a positive effect on the black girls she studied, it made them more determined to succeed (possibly self negating prophecy)

Pupil subcultures

Paul Willis ‘learning to labour’

studied an anti school subculture of working class boys who valued ‘having a laugh’ over education
They viewed education as pointless and prepared themselves for the boredom of work

Evaluation

Postmodernists (Bauman) see subcultures as a cultural identity rather than the product of labels

Pupil identities

Identity rates to how people see themselves and how others see them
These are shaped by influences both inside and outside of school
Postmodernists are that identity is a choice. Maffesoli wrote about how people join subcultures based on consumption patterns
Archer conducted longitudinal interviews with 36 students across 6 schools. Found that the environment of higher education matched the habitus of white middle class pupils. So the working class pupils experienced a culture class between their habitus and the environment of higher education
Archer also found that the young people in three study had constructed identities based upon the wearing of branded sportswear that differentiated them from middle class pupils
This led to them being further marginalised and excluded from the habitus associated with education

The hidden curriculum

a prime example of the relationships and processes that occur within the school itself

The formal curriculum

the subject knowledge taught in classes and assessed in examinations. Functionalists see these as teaching the norms and values necessary for society to function. Marxists see this as teaching people to accept inequalities in capitalism

Setting, streaming and banding

setting is where individuals are placed into groups based on their ability. This varies depending on the subject
Steaming is where individuals are placed into groups based on their ability. This is the same for all subjects
Banding is where groups of similar academic ability are taught together. Critics would suggest that this shows that selection by academic ability still exists in comprehensive schools
These are all institutional labels which can lead to positive or negative changes in teacher expectations, which can lead to the self-fullfilling prophecy.Those in lower sets may be underchallenged, or those in higher sets may struggle
Schools may try and disguise banding by giving them neutral names

1.7 EDUCATIONAL POLICIES

— educational policies are initiatives brought in by governments that have a significant impact on the education system —

1944 education act (the tripartite system)

made secondary education universal and free (around 20%)
All pupils must do the 11+ exam, which would decide what school they go to (the tripartite system). 3 schools: grammar schools, secondary modern and technical schools
Believed that students either had academic, technical or practical intelligence
Few technical schools were built so rarely used

Grammar schools

For those who performed well in the 11+ exams
Provided a path for working class pupils to access excellent secondary education, gain qualifications which could be used to access university and professional occupations

Technical schools

Focused on ‘technical’ subjects and prepared students for work in relation to trades
Students were able to get specialist training, but few were built

Secondary modern

For those who failed the 11+ (around 80%)
Did not have 6th forms and generally assumed that students would leave these schools at 16 to go onto full-time employment

Evaluation

The idea that there are 3 different types of intelligence has been discredited
The 11+ exam was culturally biased (used elaborate code), found class inequalities were reproduced
Increased labelling for students, around 80% were labelled as failures and would no longer have access to the same quality of education or the same opportunities
Some working class parents would want their children to go to secondary modern schools because they want their children straight into work and earning money. Also would not be able to afford tuition.

Comprehensive schools

schools which did not select pupils based on academic ability (mixed ability schools)
No longer had an 11+, instead went from primary school to the local comprehensive school

Evaluation

comprehensive schools still used banding, setting and streaming, so there was still a selection. Which often replicated social divisions
Social divisions arised based on location, the local schools in middle class areas were typically of higher quality
It takes a ‘one size fits all’ approach
Is not meritocratic: geographical disadvantages, teacher labelling and assessed through coursework
Does not produce a workforce that the economy needs and does not prepare students for work

New vocationalism

focuses on vocational skills and preparing students for work. Such as BTEC’s, Tlevels and apprenticeships

Evaluation

mainly taken up by working class pupils, leading to a class divide
Not viewed as highly by employers and university

1988 education reform act

providing a ‘market’ for the education system, where parents had information about the schools and could have more choice

Include:

the national curriculum. This made it easier to compare schools using standardised tests and took control away from local education authorities
SAT’s. The tests provided essential information for parents, displayed in league tables.
League tables. Rankings of school performance, to create parentocracy (giving parents more choice)
Formula funding. The schools were funded based on how many pupils they attracted, this increased competition and standards
Local management of schools. Headteachers had to look after the school budget rather than the local authorities. This cemented marketisation, and took power away from local authorities

Evaluation

national curriculum is too restrictive
SATS and league tables are leading to more students being negatively labelled, and potentially neglected if they wont improve their rankings
Myth of parentocracy, schools are still slightly based around location, the best schools will be oversubscribed and schools show covert selection (tough and Brooks)
Reproduces class inequalities as upper class parents are more aware of the system and the information out there, so will most likely get their child into a higher ranking school
Increases inequalities between schools through formula funding. Oversubscribed schools will gain more funding, which will help them improve further. While undersubscribed schools fall behind

New labour education reform

marketisation of education
Introduced academies. State funded schools, funded directly from the government rather than the local education authority
The schools can set their own admissions policies and do not follow the national curriculum, primarily used as a way to improve educational standards in working class areas
Introduced tuition fees for university
Developed SureStart and pupil premium. The educational maintenance allowance (students paid for attending school post 16). Education action zones (brought together the local community, schools and businesses to sponsor and invest in the school)

Evaluation

not consistent, trying to bridge the gap between class inequalities but introduced university tuition fees
Whitty argued that the policies were down to politics, wanted to maintain the vote of the middle class by not doing anything radical
Educational maintenance allowance was scrapped to cut public spending. Felt that the money was not appropriate for 16 year olds

Marketisation and privatisation

being owned by private companies (e.g academies) while being funded by the government
Ball and Youdell identified endogenous and exogenous privatisation.
Endogenous means that schools are privatised from within, due to marketisation policies the schools must operate in a similar way to private companies. They advertise, they take over schools and parents are treated like consumers
Exogenous privatisation is the role of private companies

Evaluation

this was implemented in Sweden, and they have failure to raise standards

Globalisation and education policy

The idea that the world has become more interconnected
This means schools now compete on a global level and the types of jobs have changed, so education needs to change to ensure students are being prepared as there’s no longer a correspondence between school and work (Bowles and gintis)
Can implement policies from other countries, e.g free schools in Finland

Evaluation

not all sociologists agree that globalisation is really happening, also suggesting that the education system has always responded to changes in the worlds economy
Some educational policies and approaches may not work in different countries