Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
MARXIST PERSPECTIVE ON EDUCATION - Coggle Diagram
MARXIST PERSPECTIVE ON EDUCATION
[ALTHUSSER] THE IDEOLOGICAL STATE APPARATUS
Marxists see the state as the means by which the capitalist ruling class maintain their dominant position
Althusser says the state consists of 2 elements (apparatuses), which both serve to keep the bourgeoisie in power
THE REPRESSIVE STSTE APPARATUS:
maintain the rule of the bourgeoisie by force, or the threat of it
include police, courts & army
when necessary they sue physical coercion (force) to repress the w/c
THE IDEOLOGICAL STATE APPARATUS:
maintain the rule of the bourgeoisie by controlling peoples ideas, values and beliefs
include religion, media & education system
In althussers view, the education system is an important ISA, which performs 2 functions:
Education reproduced class inequality by transmitting it from generation to generation by failing each successive generation of w/c pupils in turn
Education legitimates (justifies) class inequality by producing ideologies that disguise its true cause- which is to persuade workers to accept that inequality is inevitable snd they deserve their subordinate position in society (if they accept these ideas they're less likely to challenge capitalism)
[BOWLES & GINTIS] SCHOOLING IN CAPITALIST AMERICA
American Marxists Bowles & Gintis argue that capitalism requires a workforce with the kinds of attitudes, behaviour and personality type best suited to their role as alienated and exploited workers willing to accept hard work, low pay and orders from above
in the view of Bowles & Gintis, this is the role of the education system in capitalist society
it is to reproduce an obedient workforce that will accept inequality as inevitable
From their own study, of 237 New York high school students, they conclude that schools reward personality traits that make for a submissive, compliant worker
e.g they found that students who showed independence and creativity tended to get lower grades
those who showed characteristics linked to obedience and discipline tended to get higher grades
they conclude from this evidence that schooling helps produce the obedient workers that capitalism needs
they dont believe education fosters personal development, it stunts and distorts it
THE CORRESPONDENCE PRINCIPLE & THE HIDDEN CURRICULUM
Bowles & Gintis argue there are close parallels between schooling and work in capitalist societies:
Both are hierarchies of authorities, with head teachers or bosses at the top making decisions & giving orders
There is alienation in school through students lack of control over education (e.g what to study), and in the workplace alienation through workers lack of control over production
Extrensic satisfaction in schools e.g from grades, and in the workplace extrinsic satisfaction from pay
Competition and divisions among students in schools, and in workplace competition through differences in status & pay
They refer to these parallels between school and workplace as examples of the 'correspondence principle'
the relationships and structures found in education mirror/correspond to those of work
They argue the correspondence principle operates through the hidden curriculum- all the lessons learnt in school without being directly taught
e.g pupils becoming accustomed to accepting hierarchy and competition, working for extrinsic rewards
in this way, schooling prepares working class pupils for there role as exploited workers of the future, reproducing the workforce capitalism needs
COHEN argues that youth training schemes serve capitalism by teaching young workers not genuine job skills, but rather attitudes and values needed in a subordinate labour force
it lowers their aspirations so they accept low paid work
THE MYTH OF MERITOCRACY
BOWLES & GINTIS describe the education system as a 'giant myth-making machine'
a key myth that education promotes is the 'myth of meritocracy'
Meritocracy = everyone having an equal opportunity to achieve, rewards are based on ability & effort, and those who gain highest rewards deserve them becausenthey are most able and hardworking
Unlike Functionalists, Bowles & giants argue meritocracy in fact doesnt exist
evidence shows that the main factor determining whether someone has a high income is their family and class background, not because of their ability or educational achievemnt
By disguising this fact, the myth of meritocracy serves to justify the privileges of the higher classes, making it seem that they gained them through succeeding in open & fair competition in school
this helps persuade the w/c to accept inequality as legitimate, and making it less likely they will seek to overthrow capitalism
The education system also justifies poverty, through what Bowles & Gintis describe as the 'poor-are-dumb' theory of failiure
it blames poverty on the individual rather than blaming capitalism
'im poor because im wasn't clever enough/didnt work hard enough in school'
it therefore plays an important part in reconciling workers to their exploited position, making them less likely to rebel against the system
[WILLIS] LEARNING TO LABOUR
All marxists agree that capitalism cannot function without a workforce thats willing to accept exploitation
They see education as reproducing class inequality which ensures that w/c pupils learn to accept jobs that are poorly paid & alienating
Although Bowles & Gintis see education as a straightforward process of indoctrination into the myth of meritocracy, Willis disagrees
WILLIS' study shows that pupils can resist such attempts to indoctrinate them
he combines his marxist view of wanting to see how schooling serves capitalism, with an interactionist approach
this focuses on the meanings pupils give to their situationand how this enables them to resist indoctrination
THE LADS COUNTER-CULTURE
Using qualitative research including participant observations * unstructured interviews, Willis studied the counter-school culture of 'the lads' (12 w/c boys) as they make the transition from school to work
The lads form a distinct counter-culture opposed to the school
They are scornful of the conformist boys who listen to what the teachers tell them to do
the lads find school boring and meaningless, and dont follow its rules or values e.g smoking & drinking, disrupting classes
For the lads, these acts of defianc is a way of resisting the school- They reject the schools meritocratic ideology that w/c pupils can achieve middle class jobs through hard work
Willis notes the similarity between the lads anti-school counter-culture and the shopfloor culture of male manual workers
Both cultures see manual work as superior to intellectual work
From them identifying strongly with manual work, it explains why they see themselves superior both to girls & conformist boys
It also explains why the lads counter culture resistance to school helps them slot into the very jobs (inferior skill, pay & conditions), that capitalism needs someone to perform
E.G Having been accustomed to boredom and finding ways to amuse themselves at school, they dont expect satisfaction from work and are good at finding diversions to ope with the tedium of unskilled labour
their acts of rebellion guarantee they will end up in unskilled jobs by ensuring their failure to gain good qualifications
For willis, the irony is that by resisting the schools ideology, the lads counter-culture ensures they're destined for the unskilled work capitalism needs someone to perform
EVALUATION
Marxist approaches useful in exposing the myth of meritocracy
they show the role education plays in an ideological state apparatus, serving the interests of capitalism by reproducing class inequality
Postmodernists criticise Bowles & Gintis' correspondence principle on the grounds that todays post-fordist economy requires schools to produce a very different kind of labour force than the one argued by marxists
postmodernists argue that education now reproduces diversity not inequality
Marxists disagree with each other about how reproduction & legitimisation take place
Bowles & Gintis take a deterministic view, assuming pupils have no free will & passively accept indoctrination
This approach fails to explain why many pupils reject the schools values
Critics argue that Willis' account of the lads romanticises' them, portraying them as w/c heroes despite their anti-social behaviour and sexist attitudes
His small scale study of 12 boys is unlikely to be representative of other pupils experience, so cant be generalised
Willis rejects the view that school simply brainwashes pupils into passively accepting their fate
By combing marxist & interactionist approaches, he shows how pupils may resist he school and yet how this still leads them into w/c jobs
Critical modernists e.g Morrow & Torres argue that marxists take a 'class first' approach thats sees class as the key for inequality, ignoring all other kinds