Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Theories of Education Sociology - Coggle Diagram
Theories of Education Sociology
Functionalist views
education creates
social solidarity
- Durkheim 'a school is society in miniature'. Makes children feel that they are part of something bigger and working together to achieve shared goals.
education teaches the
norms and values
that prepare children to be fully functioning members of society.
Secondary socialisation
so children adapt to cope in wider world
believe that the education system is
meritocratic
: equal opportunities for all and rewarded based on a combo of effort and ability. This allocates roles based on meritocracy and therefore gives the best suited roles to people
education gives a
variety of qualifications
which teaches the
specialised skills
required for the workplace e.g GCSEs + A-levels
Evaluation
ignores negative aspects e.g bullying
Postmodernists argues education kills creativity by teaching to the test
Marxists argue it is idealogical beliefs from the view of the powerful who the education system benefits
team sports and assemblies show social solidarity
increased amount of vocational courses = more work focused
those with degrees earn 85% more than those with only GCSEs = meritocracy
Durkheim
secondary socialisation --> passes on norms and values of society. primary socialisation within family
happens by instilling social solidarity, teaching social rules and how to abide them, teaching specialist skills
Evaluation
Hargreaves (1982) argued ed. system teaches competition and individualism e.g exams which does not bring social solidarity
Marxists question where the shared norms and values come from and their purpose. Feel that there is not one set of neutral values for everyone
Parsons
influenced by Durkehim, shares idea that education establishes norms and values
education facilitates role allocation and helps society be meritocratic
education sifts and sorts people into jobs
teaches children the value of effort as effort leads to them being rewarded and ensures they get right role in society
Evaluation
Marxists argue myth of meritocracy and that sifting and sorting is based on more than just effort (ruling class have privileges etc.)
Bowles and Gintis study showed IQ had little part in economical success and it was more down to social class, gender, ethnicity
Davis + Moore
Evaluation
Marxists argue education fails to sift and sort people based on meritocracy because wealthy people have advantage
higher qualification do not always = higher incomes, e.g social class, family connections effect it too
developed the idea of education and meritocracy, argued society needs a system of unequal rewards to create competition to facilitate meritocracy. e.g more effort = higher paying job this serves to sift and sort people into jobs
Marxist views
Education
reproduces class inequalities
. Middle class use material and cultural capital to help children succeed, making sure they get middle class jobs and continue class inquality
Education teaches children
norms and values
that prepare them for the
Capitalist workforce
: Bowles and Gintis
correspondance theory
e.g hierachy, uniform, subservience
Education is not meritocratic, rewards/success based on social class - '
myth of meritocracy'
is used to create a
false class consciousness
. Schools make us feel it is our fault when we fail when it is really down to social class inequalities
Education works to
suit only the powerful
- ruling class and Capitalist society
Evaluations
existance of private schools shows that you can pay for a better education = based on social class rather than meritocracy
elite jobs e.g medicine and law have high number of privately educated people so more money = higher paying job
working class suffer from material deprivation so middle class students tend to do better in school
pupils do not always succumb to myth of meritocracy - Paul Willis' study of 'The Lads' showed the boys were aware that the middle class students were getting better education than them.
modern economy means not all bosses want workers to be robots. correspondance theory no longer relevant
Louis Althusser
education part of idealogical state apparatus (spreads message of bourgeoisie ideology and ensure false class consciousness)
bourgeoise maintain power through repressive state apparatus (army and police) and idealogical state apparatus
schools prepare working class children for lifetime of exploitation
being taught norms and values e.g hierarchy, subservience, respect for authority is to prevent rebellion and revolution from working class
norms and values benefit capitalist consensus
Evaluation
Durkheim also thinks schools teach norms and values but these are to create a value consensus for a fully functioning society
Functionists think norms and values in hidden curriculum = fully functioning society
Bowles and Gintis
correspondance between school and workplace
hierachy, rewards + sanctions, passive + docile, motivation by extrinsic rewards e.g money, grades
Why? Schools work directly in interest in capitalist system so purpose of schools to reproduce workforce. Capitalism prevents people from doing interesting and enjoyable jobs as look to extrinsic rewards e.g money
Evaluation
outdated, schools are not the same as 1970s and encourage more creativity and individuality, democracy is used so students have a voice
Functionalists feel it is positive for the norms and values to be taught and to prepare children for workforce
workforce is now different than 1970s, factories less common as economy has changed to more service roles than manufacturing
Bourdieu
having capital (money) gives wealthy power and cultural assets
children of middle class families are likely to have knowledge, behaviour and attitudes that ensures success
schools sometimes assess cultural capital rather than intelligence so middle class students get better labels and in turn succeed
developed idea of habitus so cultural capital not just knowledge e.g knowing latin, but deeply engrained values
teachers more likely to be middle class thus have middle class habitus thus get on with middle class children better
working class habitus more likely to be labeled negatively
Evalutation
Interactionalists suggest teachers can go against the regime of school and how they respond to it (but OFSTED + headteachers make this hard
Neo-marxists argue that most teachers enter the system wanting to make a difference in children's lives and to the system, but the regime of the system makes this impossible and so they end up continuing to judge students and do the opposite to their intentions due to the regime of the school
Bernstein
elaborate and restricted language codes
teachers, textbooks + exam papers + middle class students share elaborate language code and working class children have restricted language code
aspects of education assess extent of having middle class habitus rather than intelligence
Evaluation
teachers come from a range of social backgrounds, more working class now go to uni so some teachers will have working class habitus and language code
some argue they become middle class when become a teacher
New Right Views
Education's main aim should be to
increase economic growth
thus should teach children in ways that prepare them for workforce
Marketisation
should be used to increase
parentocracy
(parents choosing which school their child goes to) and economic growth. League tables established.
National Curriculum
introduced to ensure all schools are teaching same values which is important in a shared society
Evaluations
Policies have raised standards in schools
countries with most competitive systems are top of PISA league tables which shows marketisation works to increase standards of success
national curriculum is critiqued for being too restrictive and ethnocentric
marketisation encourages teaching to the test
Feminist views
Liberal feminists
recognise that there
has been changes to the education system but that there is still further to go
e.g girls now outperform boys in school but Stanworth (1983) argues teachers still have higher expectations for boys, students now have choice between all subjects regardless of gender
Radical feminists
education system is still
fundamentally patriarchal + marginalises and oppresses women
. Argue school does this to prepare women for workforce and so that they expect this treatment and accept it. Banyard (2011) recognised how sexual harassment was taken less seriously than bullying in school
Black and difference feminists
not all girls have same experience in education
and ethnic minority girls are victims to stereotyping and assumptions e.g muslim girls assumed to have different career aspirations to their peers
Evaluations
gender pay gap and glass ceiling shows women unequal in workplace despite outperforming boys at school
girls more likely to take time off for child rearing, work part time and do more housework. Education system normalises this so girls accept doing it
Stanworths view out of date as more girls going to higher education
girls outperforming boys so patriachal aspect of education is failing to benefit boys
Labelling Theory
Howard Becker
Teachers apply labels in relation to ability, potential or behaviour. Can be positive or negative
Marxists perspective and they believe labels are a way to keep everyone in their place as people often internalise and stick to their labels = self-fulfilling prophecy
Interactionalists believe labels are a choice to accept = self-refuting policy can go against them
Halo effect = label linked to different attributes of a person e.g how they look and speak. This effects how teachers interpret the students behaviour e.g the ideal student may not be told off as badly
Gilborn and Youdell - idea of triage in schools: argue that schools categorise students into different groups based on potential to achieve and then decide how much effort to put into teaching those children.
Caused due to pressure to achieve highly from league tables
Evaluation
Hard to prove extent of labelling as teachers can deny they do it, subconscious and subjective based on their own norms and values
Mirza's study 'Young, Black and Female' showed that labels caused black girls to succeed. Interactionalists see this as a self-refuting prophecy
No explanation in this theory as to why some students internalise their labels and others reject them
Rosenthal and Jacobson
field experiments in elementary schools in USA
IQ test at beginning and end
randomly identified 'spurters' (gifted chilldren)
Children who were told they were gifted developed a lot more than those who were not told even though they were randomly picked
findings support self-fulfilling prophecy
ethical issues with experimenting on children and interfering with their education
Pupil Subcultres
Paul Willis 'Learning to Love Labour' - The Lads
study on working class boys focussing on their attitudes to study and school
Marxist perspective
interested as to why working class children likely to go on to get WC jobs. Wanted to consider wy education reproduces class inequalities
'The Lads' frowned upon academic success, liked mucking about, had opposition to pro school subcultures, believed school was for middle class kids, wanted to leave school and get jobs, truancy, having a laff
Pro-school subcultures can be formed too
Mirza and Ghail acknowledged some subcultures were against school as an institution but pro-education
Evaluation
Willis argued subcultures interacted with life outside school and structure of society not just internal factors.
Interactionalists find relationship between teachers and pupils and subcultures interesting so agree that it is interesting of the interaction of subcultures and society
Post-modernists believe subcultures are based on cultural identity rather than labelling e.g music taste, fashion preference etc.
Pupil Identities
Interested in by Post-modernists
they argue it is down to choice
Maffesoli (1997) 'time of the tribes' argued that people opt in and out of different tribes based on choice e.g music choice
Identities are fluid and can change
how people see themselves and how others see them
partly shaped by labels from teachers, peers and the subcultures they are in
originally identities emerge from ethnicity, gender, social class
at school they are shaped by interactions with other pupils + teachers
Hidden Curriculum
things taught be school is subtle or covert way
Functionalists believe things taught in HC are needed for fully functioning society (norms + values)
Feminists see it as a way to teach norms and values that suit patriachy
Marxists see it as way to teach norms and values suit Capitalism
e.g uniform, hierarchy, respecting authority
Setting, streaming and banding
setting = individuals placed in sets based on ability, can be different for each subject
more flexible than streaming as children can be gifted in different ways/levels
streaming = students split into groups based on ability but one group for all subjects
banding = pupils of similar academic ability all taught together
criticism = shows that selection by academic ability still happens, meant to be removed by comprehensivisation
they create institutional labels and give children different images of themselves
some schools use neutral names to disguise groups