Sociological Perspectives in Education and Training 2011/12 Module Code: SIT114

What is education for? Discuss with reference to at least two sociological perspectives drawing upon some examples of research on education and training. Education is, although a simple concept, a hugely contested and discoursed area of society. In viewing education in regards to two sociological perspectives, this essay will shed light on the ideological and practical, the conceptual and the evidence based, hopefully providing significant insight into what education is for. In addressing Marxism or Neo-Marxism, this essay will underline some of the key points of Marxist academics and case studies, whilst the viewpoint of Functionalism or Structural Functionalism will address the often opposing but sometimes complementary views of Functionalists. At the same time this essay will set out to provide basis for such arguments in its referencing to key case studies which back up the ideas and concepts. It will concentrate on the sociological perspectives ideas, certain key educationally linked and mutually relevant notions and ultimately attempt to answer the constant question of what is education for?

To establish how these sociological perspectives address the issue of education, it is pertinent to first establish the basic principles and concepts relating to the movements as a whole, from which we can have a greater and deeper understanding of the perspectives attitudes towards society in general, which in both perspectives is intrinsically and ideologically linked to education. It relates to Marxism in that capitalist society Work, education knowledge everything is metamorphosed into money... knowledge is thought of as property; it is capital (Sarup 1978, pp. 143-144), and hence it

Candidate Number 1109506

Sociological Perspectives in Education and Training 2011/12 Module Code: SIT114

relates to the overlying view in Marxism that it is subject, like work and all areas of society, to the division of labour of the two great classes, oppressor and oppressed, stood in constant opposition... Bourgeoisie and Proletariat (Marx 1848, p. 73). These two groups form the societal structure make up in terms of human capital as Marxism sees it, the base and superstructure (Moore 2004 p. 38)

But to say that education is seen completely in this simplistic view would but naive as education and Marxism have a much more complex relationship; Marx wrote very little on education (Moore 2004, p. 47) but we do know that education is actually not seen as the problem in Marxist thought as the roots of repression and inequality lie not in the educational system but in the structure and functioning of the capitalist economy (Sarup 1978, p. 167) and as such is seen as pertinent to the equality of society and social revolution. It is however the system in which education and its consumption is rationed which is the problem, as Fulcher and Scott (2007, p. 31) state Unless bourgeois thought was subjected to criticism from the proletariat, it would remain simply an intellectual defence of the existing social order and as such education which pertains to the latent bourgeoisie values, norms and ideology which sully the education curricula, simply reinforce, as Burgess (1986, p. 13) quoting Banks claims The controlling and integrating functions of education and its role in the transmission of... the value system of society.

Functionalism however is at odds with these views and is much more accepting of the societal structure, emphasising similar concepts but for

Candidate Number 1109506

Sociological Perspectives in Education and Training 2011/12 Module Code: SIT114

different purposes. Burgess (1986, p.12) succinctly states that functionalism is based upon consensus, equilibrium, and shared values and that the functionalist perspective sees education... in terms of its function to provide a literate and adaptable workforce for an advanced industrial society, a submission which the population is interested in (Durkheim 1956 p. 82). It also puts emphasis on social facts distinct from facts of individual consciousness as ways of acting, thinking, or feeling that are collective, rather than individual (Fulcher and Scott 2007, p. 33) furthering the idea of a collective and willing society, and the permeance by which its construct of shared norms infiltrates and holds together the societal form. In this way, functionalism is contradicting to the Marxist stance in that it claims that education is consensual, in that each person shares the same ideals, beliefs and norms which education promotes and it is this glue which is necessary for the survival of society (Burgess 1986, p. 12). A Marxist perspective here would argue this is simply an intellectual defence of the norm, of the superstructure, and that it is simply prescribed content, and the focus upon the collective not the individual.

Production and Re-production

Both Marxism and Functionalism to some extent acknowledge the role of education as a mode of production and similarly reproduction (Fulcher and Scott 2007, p. 30). Marxist perspectives see education as a mode of production involving pupils and teachers, and knowledge is both private property and cultural capital. Schools are factories (Sarup 1978, p. 129). This

Candidate Number 1109506

Sociological Perspectives in Education and Training 2011/12 Module Code: SIT114

idea of an educational factory, a production line, is furthered by a case study by Bowles and Gintis called Schooling In Capitalist America (1976) which furthered this concept; Sarup quoting this states that the education system produces a stratified labour force for the capitalist enterprise (1978, p. 167) and the economic system reproduces economic inequality, and distorts personal development (1978, p. 176). This view of education as a production line simply mass producing workers is seen for the purpose of the upholding of the superstructure at the expense of the base, the bourgeois power and control over the proletariat masses, as Marx states the educational system is for exploitation... naked, shameless, direct, brutal exploitation (1848, p. 74). This concept is linked to the reproduction of structure in the workplace, with pupils later fulfilling roles originally set out in education, as stated by Benn and Chitty quoting from Bowles and Gintis in saying that all educational systems are there to reproduce the relationships of capitalism and prepare those going through them for their allotted occupational posts (1996, p. 60).

Functionalism in fact carries much the same view of education, but utilises different terms to explain it, focusing on the chosen norms and freedom of the education system rather than as a class device to uphold the bourgeois control. It is viewed as as agent of socialization and allocation (Burgess 1986, p. 13), Burgess quotes Parsons saying that how the school class functions to internalize in its pupils both the commitments and capacities for successful performance of their future adult roles, and second of how it functions to allocate these human resources within the role structure of the adult society (1986, p. 13). Durkheim furthers this notion by stating that

Candidate Number 1109506

Sociological Perspectives in Education and Training 2011/12 Module Code: SIT114

essentially the child must be prepared for the function that he will be called upon to fulfill (1956, p. 79). The difference is that whilst Marxism and Functionalism see educational structure under capitalism as a means of production, functionalism sees the participant as willing, and speaks of the notion of societal duty (Durkheim 1956, p. 87) as well as opposing Marxism in that is believes the system provides a equality of opportunity through the educational system (Fulcher and Scott 2007, p.323) focusing on the concept of the welcome system in society rather than an enforced one. What this key discrepancy highlights is the obvious need of attention in the values or ideology of both perspectives in specific respect to education.

Values and Ideology

Academics in Marxist and Functionalist thought both agree in the existence of a system of values, norms or ideologies which permeate the educational system. However the use of these and the differences of their positions towards these ideas make it pertinent to cover these in greater detail. In relation to the capitalist production system, Moore quotes Bowles and Gintis stating that the values are a ideological defence of capitalist inequality and that the social relations of production are intrinsically political (2004, p. 48); this shows how the process itself as viewed by a Marxist perspective sees the ideology of the process, the embedding of norms as the continuation... of a bourgeois norm (Levitas 1974, p. 65) and the internalisation of behavioural norms which act as a built-in supervisor (Sarup

Candidate Number 1109506

Sociological Perspectives in Education and Training 2011/12 Module Code: SIT114

1978, p. 166) to the educational process forming the minds of the malleable young into cogs for the capitalist machine. Speaking specifically on the educational content itself, Marxism sees this as tainted by the system it inhabits, Fulcher and Scott state that members of a dominant class see the world differently from those who stand below them in the class hierarchy... knowledge, then, is relative or ideological... It is historically determined by the class position of the knower (2007, p. 31). This means to Marxism that educational content is only of use outside of the capitalist, ideologically charged system, and as such teachers simply transmit these hidden ideologies as does the system, and all education in a controlled society is simply for ideological defence.

Functionalism stresses on the importance of socialization in the system, the imparting of these values and mores like Marxism, but does not agree with the positions reasons why. Durkheim declares a whole set of ideas... on right and duty, on society, on the individual... all education has as its object to fix them in our minds and education. Its function, then, is to arouse in the child... physical and mental states (1956 p. 79). This highlights that functionalism views norms and mores not only as a part of education, but as one of the main reasons for education. This is significant because it tells us that education in terms of Functionalism is highly dependent upon the norms and mores it stresses, that they not only exist, but they are key to the functionalist approach putting it at odds with Marxism despite both acknowledging the very real existence. The reasons for the weight given to it in functionalist thought are evident when we examine the Functionalist

Candidate Number 1109506

Sociological Perspectives in Education and Training 2011/12 Module Code: SIT114

concepts of roles, citizenship and social stability. Durkheim speaks of a persons role in society, how they are a citizen and how a role is expected, required, or imposed ways of acting, thinking or feeling and is tied to a sense of obligation (Fulcher and Scott 2007, p. 33). This shows how the view of the Proletariat as slaves of the society as Marxism would see it, in Functionalism instead promotes the concept of obligation and roles, providing a sense of importance and duty to the individual emphasising the perspectives notion of inherent freedom in capitalist society, and of the ability to achieve greater things through hard work and roles which are respectable rather than positions of control. The reason for this is for Durkheims idea of social solidarity which is at odds to the Marxist idea of social mobility and something to discuss further.

Social Mobility and Social Solidarity

Durkheim mentions the key concept behind these shared norms and mores as being social solidarity (Fulcher and Scott 2007, p. 35), societys stability per say, and this to Functionalism is the greater good to which we should all connect. Relating to the norms it relies on it is tied to cooperation and reciprocity and revolves around a sense of similarity and a consciousness of unity and community (Fulcher and Scott 2007, p. 37), in this way it helps ensure the survival of the economy and the construct of modern capitalist society. The means by which this defence of the system is maintained is through the imbedding in society of the concept of aims, goals and achievements; the means and ends of the functionalist view which make

Candidate Number 1109506

Sociological Perspectives in Education and Training 2011/12 Module Code: SIT114

society a case of you get what you deserve, as Fulcher and Scott mention Means are those things that help to achieve these goals: working hard, money and they should pursue this end though occupational achievement: they should work diligently and efficiently in order to be promoted to a higher salary (2007, p. 47). These concepts are once again linked to the overarching themes of functionalism; ideas of individual equality, specific function and earned worth and position in society.

Marxist thought however relates to this and sees the impression of social mobility as a primary illusion (Levitas 1974, p. 59) for the Proletariat, a ruse which the bourgeoisie use to maintain social control and exploitation. Moore explains that class position through the promotion of equality of opportunity, expressed through education-linked social mobility (the move from ascribed to achieved status) (2004, p. 39) is the prescribed dream but at the same time is merely the defence. Levitas follows this when he states that in actual fact what we know of aristocracies is that they tend to inhibit rather than sponsor mobility (Levitas 1974 p. 57). It is through market mechanisms this illusion, this theoretic possibility of escape from exploitation for the Proletariat, is in fact the controlling method which gives the impression of freedom when the oppressed are actually being controlled Levitas 1974 p. 57. Paul Willis in his 1997 study saw this restriction on the working class oppressed when examining the limitations of social mobility, that in fact the system prepared them for manual labour jobs due to their background, locking the boys into a world of manual labour (Burgess 1986, p. 17).

Candidate Number 1109506

Sociological Perspectives in Education and Training 2011/12 Module Code: SIT114

Individualism and collectivism

The last area to look at specifically in relation to Functionalism and Marxism is the emphasis on the individual and the collective in relation to education. Marxism focuses on the plight of the individual, in that it views each pupil as unique and knowledge as relative to its owner. Under the capitalist society, Marxists believe as Sarup states the pupils knowledge is taken away from him, or to be precise, he dissociates the knowledge from himself, because the pupils needs or individuality is not considered (Sarup 1978, p. 142). This is a problem as the unification which Functionalism stresses is the same illusion which prevents the socialist revolution which Marx predicted, helped by the previously talked about structures of limitation of social mobility which remain hostile to the individual need for personal development(Sarup 1978, p. 167), the individual is therefore limited in their freedom. Marxists view this as controlled education in its collectivism whilst Functionalists view this as necessary for social solidarity and correct functioning of society.

It has been said Functionalists argue in respect to the needs of society as a whole (Fulcher and Scott 2007, p. 321), and in terms of the individual and Functionalist there is no difference. As Durkheim states, in response to the mention that intellectual happiness is dependent on individuality, such a formula, then, leaves the end of education undetermined and, therefore, education itself, since it is left to individual fancy (Durkheim 1956, p. 77), and as such an open education, would be damaging to society compared to a

Candidate Number 1109506

Sociological Perspectives in Education and Training 2011/12 Module Code: SIT114

collective one, which puts emphasis on the fancy in its disregarding of individual educational needs. In fact, Functionalism sees it not only as an opposing view but as a problem to Functionalism itself, a danger that abnormal forms of the division of labour will develop (Fulcher and Scott 2007, p. 37) leading to Functionalist viewed problems such as moral individualism, and sees all these problems would be reduced when the division of labour was properly established (Fulcher and Scott 2007, p. 37). Durkheim himself stated that the subordination of the individual to society made people aware of their responsibilities to each other and to the wider community (Fulcher 2007, p. 321) showing how the individuality of the educational system is repressed through the division of labour and the aforementioned norms and mores of collectivism in Functionalist views of society.

To conclude then, when we ask the question what is education for in regards to these sociological perspectives, it is clear that a simple answer would be betraying of the reality. For both perspectives education is not only focused on the imbedding of knowledge itself, but its place in society, the value of knowledge and both are heavily concerned with the institutions in which education is situated. For Marxism education is simply tainted with the system it inhabits, and is ideology laden; a Marxist case study on education outside of the western capitalism system would shed light on a more specific view of education but due to limitations this is not possible in this examination. Functionalism sees education as a practical resource to suit its own end goals and wants, societal solidarity and economic prosperity. In this way it has to be asked why the intrinsic value is not questioned in either of these movements,

10

Candidate Number 1109506

Sociological Perspectives in Education and Training 2011/12 Module Code: SIT114

rather than just the use to society. This in part could have something due to the movements basiss in the 19th and 20th centuries and as such do not necessarily relate to the western neo-capitalism we facilitate in the 21 st century; they both concentrate on a more industrial landscape and a class system, while now western society has a skills and knowledge based work force and a changed class system. While this examination has highlighted areas of contention and debate in the sociological and educational sector, it is clear there is more research on a much larger scale before such a question can be answered sufficiently, but from the information and research into these two perspectives, education is for its grander purpose in the scheme of societal issues of western capitalist society.

11

Candidate Number 1109506

Sociological Perspectives in Education and Training 2011/12 Module Code: SIT114

Bibliography

Ball, S. 1995. Circuits of Schooling: A Sociological Exploration of Parental Choice of School in Social-Class Contexts. In Halsey, A.H, Lauder, H, Brown, P and Wells, A.W. Education: Culture, Economy, Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 409-421 Bates, I and Riseborough, G. 1993. Youth and Inequality. Buckingham: Open University Press. Benn, C and Chitty, C. 1996. Thirty Years On: Is Comprehensive Education Alive and Well, or Struggling to Survive? London: David Fulton Publishers Bowles, S and Gintis, H. 1976. Schooling in Capitalist America: Educational Reform and the Contradictions of Economic Life . London: Routledge Brown, P. 1995. Cultural Capital and Social Exclusion: Some Observations on Recent Trends in Education, Employment, and the Labour Market. In Halsey, A.H, Lauder, H, Brown, P and Wells, A.W. Education: Culture, Economy, Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp.736-749 Burgess, R. 1986. Sociology, Education and Schools. London: B.T Batsford Durkheim, E. 1956. Education: Its Nature and Its Role in Lauder, H, Brown, P, Dillabough and Halsey, A.H. Education, Globalization and Social Change . Oxford: Oxford University Press Brown, P.2003. The Opportunity Trap in Lauder, H, Brown, P, Dillabough and Halsey, A.H. Education, Globalization and Social Change . Oxford: Oxford University Press Fulcher, J and Scott, J. 2007. Sociology. Oxford: Oxford University Press

12

Candidate Number 1109506

Sociological Perspectives in Education and Training 2011/12 Module Code: SIT114

Lauder, H, Brown, P, Dillabough and Halsey, A.H. 2006. Introduction: The Prospects for Education: Individualization, Globalization and Social Change in Education, Globalization and Social Change . Oxford: Oxford University Press Levitas, M. 1974. Marxist Perspectives in the Sociology of Education . London: Routledge Marx, K. 1848. Capitalism, the Global Reach in Lauder, H, Brown, P, Dillabough and Halsey, A.H. Education, Globalization and Social Change . Oxford: Oxford University Press Meighan, R and Harber, C. 2007. A Sociology of Educating. London: Continuum International Publishing Group Moore, R. 2004. Education and Society: Issues and Explanations in the Sociology of Education. Cambridge: Polity Press Power, S and Whitty, G. 2006. Education and the Middle Class: A Complex and Crucial Case for the Sociology of Education in Lauder, H, Brown, P, Dillabough and Halsey, A.H. Education, Globalization and Social Change . Oxford: Oxford University Press Sarup, M. 1978. Marxism and Education. London: Routledge Willis, P. 1977. Learning to Labour: How Working Class Kids get Working Class Jobs. New York: Colombia University Press Wolf, A. 2002. Does Education Matter? Myths about Education and Economic Growth. London: Penguin

13

Candidate Number 1109506