Unit 2- Education, Methods and Methods in context. (Revision)

Lucie Smith AES 2013

The Functionalist Perspective

Key Thinkers:

• Davis and Moore

• Parsons

• Durkheim

Research Methods: Positivist -> Quantative research eg: laboratory experiments, closed questionnaires.

Key Terms/Concepts: Socialisation (secondary), Meritocracy, Role Allocation.

Education- Functionalist View • Parsons: Secondary Socialisation Role Allocation/Meritocracy-> the universal values of

achievement. • Durkheim Social Solidarity- Socialisation, the Education system is

a microcosm of the Wider Society. Integration of individuals into the Wider Society -> creates social order based on cohesion and value consensus.

• Davis and Moore (1945) justification of inequality of achievement. ‘Principles of

stratification’ = inequality stimulates motivation -> people want to train for the top positions.

Education- Functionalist View

Meritocracy:

Talent +Motivation + Equal Opportunity = Qualifications and a high position in

society.

The Marxist Perspective: Key Thinkers: • Bowls and Gintis• Willis* • Althusser• Bourdieu • Bernstein• Giroux Research Methods: Quantative (Willis*) -> Macro Theory -> Eg;

Questionnaires, Longitudinal Surveys. Key Concepts: The myth of Meritocracy, the Hidden Curriculum,

Ideological State Apparatus/ Indoctrination.

Education- The Marxist View• Bowls and Gintis

‘The Hidden Curriculum’ recognises a close link between school and work-> there is a correspondence between pupil experiences of school and work. School = Hierarchy, motivation via reward, routine, creates subservience.

• Althusser

Ideological State Apparatus- Functionalist model -> Education installs bourgeois ideologies into the proletariat. School helps to bread a docile and obedient workforce.

• Bordieu

The Culture Capital- (KALS- Knowledge, Attitudes, Language and Skills) Middle Class norms and values -> ensure that MC kids get the top positions in society.

• Willis

‘Learning to Labour’- used triangulation to investigate working class boys. Argues that the Education System doesn’t yield an obedient workforce as working class children counter this by forming anti-school subcultures.

Education- The Marxist View (continued)

• Bernstein Study in the East End of London (1970). Found that WC children were

uncomfortable with the style of language used at school. WC = Restricted Codes. MC kids = Elaborated Codes. MC kids could communicate with teachers -> WC kids were disadvantaged.

• Giroux (1984) Analysis of Education. Argues 3 points; 1) WC pupils shape their own

education -> pupils draw upon their own subcultures in order to respond to schooling -> mainly resist schooling/capitalism. 2) Schools are a site of ideological struggle-> CLASHES between cultures because class, ethnic and religious groups all try to influence the Ethnocentric system. 3) Relative Autonomy -> education is partially independent from the economy. Helps to create the myth of equal opportunity and meritocracy. Eg; the USA (1980s) produced more graduates than the labour market required -> this lead to graduates finding themselves in unskilled jobs.

Education- Criticisms of Marxism• REYNOLDS (1984) to counter BOWLS AND

GINTIS-> the Curriculum in British Schools does NOT promote the development of the ‘perfect’ proletarian employee. Eg; increased popularity of Sociology at A-level! Students are thinking more and complying less = docility is DECREASING.

• Recent GOVERNMENT POLICY to counter BORDIEU -> Sure Start 1998 (new labour) compensatory education from a young age. Aims to give WC kids ‘equal opportunities’ by giving their mothers greater accessibility to services, in particular NURSERIES.

Education- The Feminist View • Kelly Patriarchy within Science -> Science is presented in a masculine way to divert

females away from choosing scientific courses and careers. A02 (support)-> there is a significant lack of female scientific figures.

• Colley- the Culture of Femininity and Masculinity -> cultural and ideological beliefs

about femininity and masculinity divert women away from male dominated subjects such as maths, sciences and IT. ‘Tradition’ remains dominant even though there has been a MOP. A02-> (support) Parsons -> the Instrumental and Expressive roles -> does this apply to subject/career choice?

• Heaton and Lawson The Hidden Curriculum and Gender Socialisation-> the Hidden Curriculum is

responsible for socialising women into docile, subordinate positions. Eg; ‘Food Technology’ is closely linked to domestic labour -> more popular among women. The Education System’s ‘academic’ subjects alienate women as the system is written by men.

• (LIBERAL) Wilkinson- Genderquake-> changed opportunities and attitudes means that girls are now

surpassing boys. MOP-> Increasing opportunities and changing norms and values. -> FUNDAMENTAL CHANGES IN THE POS OF WOMEN.

Education- Criticisms of the Feminist View.

• NORMAN (1998) to counter HEATON AND LAWSON.

argues that the Education system is not solely responsible for Gender Socialisation. Norman argues that Gender Socialisation has already begun before schooling at the age of 5. Boys have more educational toys while girls are encouraged to engage in make pretend with toy kitchens, dolls etc. Boys are introduced to reality -> girls to a more expressive, fictional world.

• GOVERNMENT INITATIVE to counter COLLEY and KELLY -> GIST (Girls into Science/Technology), Girls computer clubs -> MARCH OF PROGRESS. The Education system is becoming less sexist towards women.

• MITSOS AND BROWNE-Girls surpassing Boys suggests a MATRIARCHAL SYSTEM. -> Education is becoming feminised eg; Coursework, more female teachers.

Education- The New Right Perspective

• Buchanan and Tullock (1968) see our education system as a monopoly where consumers

cannot freely choose alternatives. They believe that education reflects the interests of teachers and the bureaucrats and that pupils and parents have little control over education.

• Hargreaves (1989)- ‘Kentucky Fried Schooling’-> Schools should be managed like businesses.

• Chubb and Moe- The Marketization of Education.• Salter and Tapper (1988) The four characteristics of Right Wing Education policy ->

1)Desire for social order of the individual and local choice. 2) education produces individuals to support that order. 3)education is ordered and managed in order to maintain social order. 4) Human nature limits what is both educationally desirable and possible.

Education- Criticisms of the New Right View

• (Marxist) Rikowski (2005)-> Education is becoming increasingly like a market-> it will soon become privatised and will be run ‘primarily for the benefit of shareholders.’ Views Marketization as benefiting Bourgeois interests rather than the greater good. Eg; raising education standards.

Education- The Postmodernist View

• Usher et Al

Education is mirroring postmodern trends towards greater choice and diversity. Compared to Schooling, there is an increase of use in flexible and distance learning. The Decentring of Knowledge-> ‘knowledge superiority’ is decreasing. -> a vast range of courses for students are now offered including vocational education.

Class and Differential Achievement in Education.

Education- Social Class and Achievement.

Trends: Pupils from professional backgrounds are more

likely to enter higher education. Than children from WC backgrounds.

MC pupils are more likely to do A-levels, whereas WC pupils are more likely to choose vocational education.

Pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds (In poverty) on average achieve lower scores at SATS and in GCSEs -> they are more likely to be placed in lower streams/bands and leave education at 16 to seek employment.

Education- Processes inside school Labelling, Streaming and Subcultures.

• Negative Labelling can lead to self-fulfilling prophecy of failure. Becker and Keddie (1971)-> teachers evaluate pupils in terms of

the ‘ideal student’ -> PASS -> Personality, Appearance, Social Class and Speech Codes.

• Negative Labelling can lead pupils being in lower streams/bands. Ball (1981)-> pupils in top bands were of higher social classes.

Teachers had higher expectations of them and they were taught in different ways.

Keddie (1971)-> found that MC children in the top bands had greater access to knowledge than the WC children in the lower bands.

• Negative labelling often leads to the development of Anti-School subcultures.

Hargreaves (1975)-> bottom streams are more likely to be non-conformist.

Woods (1983)-> while there are lots of different reactions to school, the WC were the most likely to form anti-school, nonconformist subcultures.

Education- the effects of material deprivation.

Statistics: o Rowntree (1997) classified one in ten children as in poverty. Poverty was defined as

being in a family that couldn’t afford at least three things other families took for granted.

Theorists: Halsey (1980)-> the most important factor that preventing WC children staying on at

school was lack of financial support.

Douglas (1964)-> children in unsatisfactory living conditions eg poor housing, lack of nutrition etc were outperformed in ability tests by children from comfortable backgrounds.

Trends: Unemployment or low income leads to material deprivation-> those in poverty has

less access to the ‘privatised’ elements of state education such as text books, internet access and schools trips.

Unemployment or low income leads to a lack of financial support-> WC families cannot afford nurseries, private schooling or university for their children.

Poverty and unsatisfactory living standards leads to health problems and absence from school.

Education- the effects of Cultural Deprivation.

Theorist: Douglas (1964)-> WC parents had less accessibility to

parental centred school activities such as open evenings and parents evenings -> this was due to inflexible work hours as opposed to lack of interest. The Children still suffered.

Trends: WC children lack MC norms and values-> Eg; Museum

trips, books and parental knowledge/acknowledgement of education.

MC styles of parenting tends to emphasise the importance of education more than WC styles.

Education- the affects of class attitudes.

Theorists: • Sugarman (1970) Pupils from manual and non manual backgrounds

had different outlooks regarding careers. Manual preferred immediate gratification whereas non manual showed more ambition towards deferred gratification.

• Hyman (1967)WC pupils had a self-imposed barrier up against

education. They had low values for education.

Education- is social class still a factor affecting education?

Theorists (recent studies):

• Willmott and Hutchinson (1992)

Manchester and Liverpool-> found that pupils who suffered material and cultural deprivation were more likely to leave school with no GCSE passes.

• Feinstein (2003)

Found that class continued to have a significant impact on achievement. Redistributive Policies (Sure Start, 1998) should carry on throughout a students entire education rather than being restricted to their pre-school years.

Using material from Item A and elsewhere, assess the view that the main function of the education system is to reproduce and legitimise social inequalities. (20 marks)

June 12

Outline some of the ways in which government educational policies may have affected social class differences in educational achievement. (12 marks)

Using material from Item A and elsewhere, assess sociological explanations for ethnic differences in educational achievement.

(20 marks)

June 11 – (Marked paper in Q drive)

• Explain what is meant by the term ‘immediate gratification’. (2 marks)

Explain what is meant by the term ‘immediate gratification’. (2 marks)

• Two marks for a satisfactory explanation or definition, such as: wanting rewards now, or leaving school as soon as possible to get a job, or similar.

• One mark for a partially satisfactory answer.

Identify three policies that may promote the marketisation of education. (6 marks)

Outline some of the functions that the education system may perform. (12 marks)

Using material from Item A and elsewhere, assess the view that factors andprocesses within the school are the main cause of differences in the educational

achievement of different social groups.