Which sociological perspective would argue that the educational system reinforces and perpetuates?

Contents

1. Sociology and Education

2. Conflict Theory

3. Stratification

4. References

1. Sociology and Education

In the broadest perspective, education refers to all efforts to impart knowledge and shape values; hence, it has essentially the same meaning as socialization. However, when sociologists speak of education, they generally use a more specific meaning: the deliberate process, outside the family, by which societies transmit knowledge, values, and norms to prepare young people for adult roles (and, to a lesser extent, prepare adults for new roles). This process acquires institutional status when these activities make instruction the central defining purpose, are differentiated from other social realms, and involve defined roles of teacher and learner (Clark 1968). Schools exemplify this type of institutionalization.

The central insight of the sociology of education is that schools are socially embedded institutions that are crucially shaped by their social environment and crucially shape it. The field encompasses both micro- and macro-sociological concerns in diverse subfields such as stratification, economic development, socialization and the family, organizations, culture, and the sociology of knowledge. To understand modern society, it is essential to understand the role of education. Not only is education a primary agent of socialization and allocation, modern societies have developed formidable ideologies that suggest that education should have this defining impact (Meyer 1977).

Sociology of education makes contribution to the understanding of an important institution present in every society-education. As a major contributer to the field of sociology and to the testing of established theories, sociology of education plays a vital role in the continuing development of sociology. Emile Durkheim is generally considered to be the founder of the sociology of education, having provided a sociological conceptualization of education as a system that transmits society’s culture and social order to new generations. Education as a part of social and cultural reproduction is linked to cultural capital and subsequent social differences between students.

2. Conflict Theory

Conflict theorists do not believe that public schools reduce social inequality. Rather, they believe that the educational system reinforces and perpetuates social inequalities that arise from differences in class, gender, race, and ethnicity. Where functionalists see education as serving a beneficial role, conflict theorists view it more negatively. To them, educational systems preserve the status quo and push people of lower status into obedience.

The fulfillment of one’s education is closely linked to social class. Students of low socioeconomic status are generally not afforded the same opportunities as students of higher status, no matter how great their academic ability or desire to learn.

Conflict theory sees the purpose of education as maintaining social inequality and preserving the power of those who dominate society. Conflict theorists examine the same functions of education as functionalists. Functionalists see education as a beneficial contribution to an ordered society; however, conflict theorists see the educational system as perpetuating the status quo by dulling the lower classes into being obedient workers. Both functionalists and conflict theorists agree that the educational system practices sorting, but they disagree about how it enacts that sorting. Functionalists claim that schools sort based upon merit; conflict theorists argue that schools sort along distinct class and ethnic lines. According to conflict theorists, schools train those in the working classes to accept their position as a lower-class member of society. Conflict theorists call this role of education the —hidden curriculum.”

Conflict theorists point to several key factors in defending their position. First, property taxes fund most schools; therefore, schools in affluent districts have more money. Such areas are predominantly white. They can afford to pay higher salaries, attract better teachers, and purchase newer texts and more technology. Students who attend these schools gain substantial advantages in getting into the best colleges and being tracked into higher- paying professions. Students in less affluent neighborhoods that do not enjoy these advantages are less likely to go to college and are more likely to be tracked into vocational or technical training. They also represent far higher numbers of minority students.

Conflict theorists contend that not only do the economics favor the white affluent, but so doesschool testing—particularly IQ testing, which schools can use to sort students. They argue that the tests, which claim to test intelligence, actually test cultural knowledge and therefore exhibit a cultural bias. For example, a question may ask: —Which one of these items belongs in an orchestra? A. accordion B. guitar C. violin D. banjo.” This question assumes considerable cultural knowledge, including what an orchestra is, how it differs from a band, and what instruments comprise an orchestra. The question itself assumes exposure to a particular kind of music favored by white upper classes. Testing experts claim they have rid modern exams of such culturally biased questioning, but conflict theorists respond that cultural neutrality is impossible. All tests contain a knowledge base, and that knowledge base is always culturally sensitive. Conflict theorists see education not as a social benefit or opportunity, but as a powerful means of maintaining power structures and creating a docile work force for capitalism.

Karl Marx sees society as an arena of social conflict. To him, function and role of social institutions can be best understood by its economic system. As per his doctrine, social institution; education system strengthens existing class system that contains two main classes: bourgeoisie, haves; and proletariat, have nots. In this system —haves” own the means of production, base and run the social institution while proletariats have not the base, they can only sell their labor at cheap rate for their survival. According to his approach, educational institutions provide the workforce to bourgeoisie class. The ideology of ruling class is disseminated by education system which establishes status quo. For this, two type of school system are developed in society: public and private. Public schools are for those people who cannot afford high fees and they are supposed to send their children to common masses schools. The other types of schools are private in which those pupils got admission whose parents has more resources and life chances with power and wealth. These schools serve the purpose to maintain status quo for elites. In contrast, the public schools seed the ideology of submission in the children of proletariats.

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure. Karl Marx Conflict Theory and Education System

Marx believes that current education system is reproducing social classes; the students passed out from the public schools have least social mobility. Bowls and Gintis (2013) support his argument —Education reproduces the attitudes and behavior for divisions of labor. It teaches people how to accept their position, to be exploited, and to show the rulers how to control the workforce”(p.03). As Marx claim that education system supports the wealthy in society and helps them in perpetuating status quo that means the students enrolled in elite school system have more exposure, facilities and chances of getting higher position and social prestige in the society.

3. Stratification

Educational differences and inequality are found in all societies where comptetion, markets and the family are central institutions. It should be noted that professional hierarchies and models of social mobility are surprisingly similar in all industrail societies (Erikson and Goldthorpe, 1992). As education and participation in society expand, the effect of social background weakens slightly (Dronkers, 1993), but this weakening can be different for students in different fields of study in higher education (Ayalon and Yogev, 2005). The persistence of differences and inequality takes distinct forms, including both the social and economic values of schooling and also the contents and the format of each kind of education (Bills, 2004; Shavit and Blossfeld, 1993; Shavit and Müller, 1998).

The social struggles over education are part of institutional characteristics of school systems: the middle classes, being in a key position, are able to influence the development of education in the direction of its exclusive aims (Ferreira, 2000; Power et al., 2003). The academic bias can distort the efforts and investments on schooling, depreciating technical formation and certificates (Barbosa, 2012; Brunello et al., 2007; Schwartzman, 2011). Social struggles can result in barriers such as the accessibility of education. Social barriers are a combination of factors preventing someone without some social resources from getting education. Sociocultural barriers represent a strong trend between the level of education quality and such characteristics as education of parents, their occupation and work position. Territorial barriers are determined by a variety of factors: type of populated area, distance from residential area to school, access to transportation, number of schools within reachable distance and level of urbanization in the area. Every one of these factors could be either an obstacle, or a resource. In analyzing economic barriers it is important to consider not only the open factors of accessibility such as family income, but also the latent ones such as chargeability of school services (sometimes as unofficial praxis). Institutional barriers are specific. If territorial, sociocultural and economic barriers can be reproduced by the educational system, these institutional barriers are created by it. Considerable research in the sociol ogy of education is thus dedicated to an examination of both the barriers and the mechanisms that create and perpetuate them (Konstantinovskiy. 2003, 2012). In addition to social class, education systems are marked by gender and ‘racial’ (ethnic) differences. Social class, gender and ‘race’ as collective identities cannot be reduced into each other, but they are not separate either: rather, they are intersectional (Crenshaw, 1991; Mirza, 2009; Santos, 2009). As a result, inequalities can be based on multiple grounds, systems of classification may cross each other, and identities may be multiple and multiply marginalized.

[...]

Which sociological perspective argues that the educational system reinforces perpetuates social inequalities arising from differences in class gender race and ethnicity?

Which sociological perspective views the educational system as perpetuating social inequality?

What is sociological perspective in education?

Which sociological perspective would emphasize how schools educate students so they can find good jobs and become productive members of society?