Theories about the role of education
FUCNTIONALIST VIEW OF EDUCATION
Ø Functionalists argue that Education is an important social institution that helps meet the
need of society and maintain social order through development of skills.
Ø They focus on the positive functions performed by the education system.
1. Social solidarity
-Education creates social solidarity by teaching core values and sense of belonging to
the wider society which results in value consensus (Durkheim)
2.Skills for work
-Education provides skills and intellectual abilities needed for future occupation (Durkheim)
3. Secondary socialization (core values)
- Education acts as the focal socializing agency Acts as a bridge between family and
wider society (Parsons)
4. Meritocracy
-Functionalists believe education is meritocratic it provides equality of opportunity and
allocates people to the most appropriate job through examination and qualification.
(Davis & Moore)
5. Role allocation
-Education is directly linked to social stratification
-Mechanism for ensuring the most talented in society are allocated to the most functionally
important position
(Davis & Moore)
POSITIVE EVALUATION
• Functionalists believe the link between education and economic growth gets that a good education
system benefits the wider society and economy.
• Education has become more work focused with more vocational qualifications.
Ø Criticism
-Durkheim assumed that society has a shared culture.
-Marxist argue that the education system serves the interest of ruling class.
-Feminist argue the education system benefits the interest of patriarchy.
-Both Durkheim and parsons fail to consider values transmitted by education benefits ruling class minority
rather than wider society, their view of education is ideological.
-Marxist argue that the education system in not meritocratic, cultural capitalà myth of meritocracy.
-School process is not meritocratic functionalist ignore negative sides of schools e.g. Bullying (interactionist.
-Work roles have different level of functional importance sweeper<accountant.
-Functionalists ignore that social inequality exists in different societies, society is marked by inequality.
NEW RIGHTS PERSPECTIVE
(Also called neoliberal perspective)
Key Features:
• Key objective is economic growth (education systems should be organized as such to ensure maximum
GDP growth)
• Globalization and deindustrialization have changed the relationship between education and the
economy.
• New rights sociologists believe that the education system must change to accommodate the change in
the economic world.
• Competition is key to economic growth, and competition only works in a free market (free from state).
-Taking monopoly away from the government will allow companies to compete with each other
-This will directly lead to better quality of goods and services
-Privatization (ownership of private investors will allow choice, efficiency, and economic growth)
• Marketisation:
Marketisation will ensure that educational institutions compete for customers in a free market.
-Consumers will have freedom to choose the best institution
-This ensures that institutions have an incentive to raise their standards and quality of teaching to attract
students.
-This directs teaching and research towards areas which are likely to have a positive impact on measurable
performance. (Ball)
Ø Suggestions by New Rights sociologists.
-For the market to work efficiently, information regarding schools and colleges should be widely available
so that parents and students can make informed decisions.
-Students must be assessed regularly and their results must be published.
-Schools can be compared on a ‘League Table’.
-Educational institutions must behave like businesses.
-Performativity- a focus on performance and its measurement.
• Globalization and education:
-Education is seen as the key to success in the increasingly competitive global market.
-Provides skills (for competing) and scientific knowledge (for technological advancements)
-Educational institutions now focus on vocationalism (by training students for future occupations)
-Ball argues that global organizations and international businesses are increasingly involved in producing
and disseminating global educational policies.
-Ball also points to the development of multinational education businesses (MNEBs)
They sell educational policies based on neoliberal policies. (Consultancy, training, management services
etc.)
• School choice process in India:
-In order to increase parental choice, some private schools are required to set aside one quarter of their
seats for students from disadvantaged backgrounds who attend for free.
Gurney, argues that this would lead to greater social segregations.
Ø Gurney explored factors affecting parents’ school choices in among low-income families
in Delhi;
-Parental identity: Their own educational experiences shaped their values concerning schooling
Many identified themselves ‘uneducated’, influencing their decision making.
-Some saw private schooling connected to social status.
• Recent Changes:
There have been various attempts to;
-Break down rigid distinctions between academic and vocational subjects through the development of new
qualifications and routes to ability.
-Move away from subject knowledge focused curriculum and develop one based on functional knowledge
and skills.
-Narrow the distinction between different types of knowledge and skills.
Evaluation:
• The education market is unfair:
-Parents of upper- and middle-class families attain better understanding regarding assessing school
systems, along with financial advantages.
-Working class parents cannot make informed decisions due to lack of information.
-Upper- and middle-class families can manipulate the market by getting the most out of them (paying for
private tutors, choosing the best reputed schools with high quality of teaching.)
-Working class families ultimately settle for cheaper schools with low quality of teaching, hence, even if
their child possesses high academic talents, they would not have opportunities to display them and use
them to their advantage.
• Higher social inequalities:
-According to Levin and Belfield, any modest improvements made are well below the levels expected by
market approach supporters.
-Children from higher income families will gain most from the market approach, leading to a wider
attainment gap between the rich and the poor. (Levin and Belfield)
(Due to financial advantages, social networks, parent’s prior knowledge etc.)
-These children will have the privilege of choosing the best reputed schools, promising successful, high-
income careers, unlike working class students.
• Selection by schools:
-Consumer choice can lead to providers’ choice instead.
-Creaming: Choosing students who appear most likely to succeed for entry to educational institutions;
-in order to maintain a high ranking in the league table, schools often allow admissions for students who
can guarantee best results (are seen most able in practice)
-More successful students often do not have enough seats to account for all students trying to get in, so
they must select. (Ranson)
-The best applicants end up being chosen. (Most likely academically gifted and able to pay tuition costs.)
• Means to an end:
-The market encourages maximization of self-interest by undermining values that promote selflessness and
cooperation. According to Ranson, markets are based on the assumption that each person will pursue
instrumental rationality.
-Education is now only about examination and testing and have lost the essence of attaining knowledge
and learning.
Williamson and Coffield claim that exam results have become a measure of success for students, teachers
and schools.
-There is no room for critical thinking. Questioning, self-awareness in the New Rights perspective, as its
main focus is on education directly serving the economy. (Hugh Lauder et al.)
MARXIST PERSPECTIVE ON EDUCATION
Key features of the view: (Karl Marx + Friedrich Engels)
• Sees society as a division of two social groups-ruling class and the subject class.
• The relation of the two classes is solely based on exploitation of the subject class by the ruling
elites.
• Education is seen as a means of social control and conformity.
Bowles and Gintis: (Correspondence theory)
• Education reproduces labor power/reproduction of class.
• Correspondence between social relationship in the workplace and in the education system.
• Uncomplaining social workers created through:
1. External rewards (positions, bonuses)
2. Submission to authority (Social relationships in school mirror the hierarchical division of
labor in the workplace)
3. Legitimating inequality (Rejection to meritocracy) (Effect of class and family background)
Evaluation of this View:
• Too deterministic; determined by economy (other social factors exist)
• Social structure acknowledged but other factors ignored (resistance)
Louis Althusser-Reproduction of Labour Power:
• Reproduction of labor power is essential for the survival of capitalist ruling class.
• Reproduction: of skills needed (for efficient labor force) and ruling class ideology. This
creates a submissive workforce.
• Education as an ideological state apparatus: Education functions as a tool to promote the
ideology and values of the ruling class. Students are taught the dominant culture, norms,
and beliefs, which help maintain the status quo and prevent them from questioning the
inequalities present in society.
Evaluation of this View:
• Little evidence to back his view
• People seen as passive subjects who simply accept their position in society (cultural
dopes)
• Elliot: “No sense of the politics of ideological struggle”
Paul Willis-Learning to Labor:
• Neo-Marxist Approach.
• Studied a boys’ school in England and established that schools are not as successful in creating
submissive individuals as Bowles and Gintis portrayed.
• He studied other factors impacting education and not just its relationship with economy.
The Counter School Culture:
• School situated in working class area; industrial town
• 12 male students were studied who were friends (lads) and together they resisted the school
system, rioting against it without feeling any sense of submission or authority towards their
teachers, seniors, or principal.
• They had no value for the education they were in school for and called the ones focused on
education: ear ‘holes.
• Not only did they ignore their work but busied themselves in irrelevant activities as well.
• Their constant yearning was directed towards immediate manual labour and this is what according
to Willis makes them better workers for the capitalist society.
Working Class Masculinity:
• The lads saw manual labor as the only real form of work that was ‘tough’
• This is how they described being masculine. Willis: this is both offensive and defensive. Helps in
their resistance.
• Mental work or desk jobs were seen as a sign of weakness.
Shop-floor culture and counter-school culture:
• Same resistance to authority was seen in the workplace by the lads as seen in their schools
• Though they never challenged any authority heads on but this was a way to resist against the
oppressive social conditions they dwelled in. (having a laff)
Evaluation of this View:
• Madeleine: “Willis’s study has greater, no less, relevance in the current school climate.”
• Schools are more exam driven then before.
• Decline in manual jobs.
• Small sample size, not generalizable.
• Ignorance towards existence of subcultures.
• Feminists reject due to the sample being generalized to all students.
• Relevance of the study challenged in today’s deindustrialized society.
Glenn Rakowski’s view on education, capitalism, and globalization:
• Rakowski’s perspective on capitalism was rooted in Marxist theory. He viewed capitalism as a
system characterized by the exploitation of labor, where workers produce value that is
appropriated by the capitalist class. He emphasized the importance of understanding how
education serves the interests of capitalism, both by training a compliant and skilled workforce
and by shaping individuals' perceptions of the world in ways that benefit the ruling class.
• He believed that education should empower students to question and challenge the existing power
dynamics and inequalities in society.
• Privatization of Education: He believed that education was influenced by globalization, with
educational policies and practices being shaped by global economic forces.
• Globalization of Education: Rakowski highlighted how neoliberal economic policies associated with
globalization often led to the commodification of education, treating it as a marketable product
rather than a public good.
Evaluation of this View:
• Critics argue that Rakowski may have overstated the case for education becoming a global
commodity.
• Other criticisms include:
1. Overemphasis on Economic Determinism: Rakowski’s Marxist framework places excessive
emphasis on economic determinism, overlooking other social, cultural, and political factors that
influence education and society.
2. Lack of Nuance in Globalization Analysis: Rakowski’s critique of globalization oversimplifies the
complexities of the phenomenon. They suggest that globalization is multifaceted and can have
both positive and negative effects on education and society.
3. Underestimation of Agency and Resistance: Individuals within the education system can engage
in acts of resistance, adaptation, and transformation, rather than being mere passive recipients of
capitalist ideology.
Social democratic perspective on education & economic growth
Key Features:
•State represents the interests of society as a whole; democratic system of government is the best way to
ensure that equal opportunities and rights are given to everybody so that they have an fair chance to
become successful.
•Social democrats believe that governments should invest heavily in education and use education as a
means to improve equality of opportunity, which in turn is the best way to ensure that education also
contributes to economic growth.
•Social Democrats criticized the Functionalist idea that the Tripartite system provided equality of
opportunity and promoted economic growth. They argued that the tripartite system needed to change to
a comprehensive system in order to do both of these things more effectively.
Equal Opportunity, Meritocracy & Economic Growth
•Social democrats also argued that a truly meritocratic education system is necessary to boost the
economic growth, because it would enable each individual to maximize their potential and thus contribute
maximally to the economic development of the country.
• Class system stands in the way of providence of equal opportunities for all, for example, middle- and
upper-class children more likely to succeed in schools and workplaces than working class children due to
social barriers (meritocracy comprised)
Evaluation/Critic:
•According to social democratic theory, there are two ways to achieve equality of opportunities:
1) changing the education system, 2) changing the class system. Both solutions done in order to eliminate
inequality that divide our society. But still little to no progress made even in Britain to reduce class
differences since 1940s.
•Too much importance placed on changing education system to reduce inequality of educational
opportunities because it’s evident that ‘education can’t make up for the inequalities in the wider society’.
•Only a reduction in inequality in the society as a whole can reduce inequality in educational opportunities
(social democratic theory) however according to data from OECD, inequality has grown steadily.
•Feminists argue that education system does not run on the principles of equality and fair opportunities
because the existence of gender inequality in the wider society favors boys more than girls.
•Schools curriculums fail to meet employers’ requirements hence is not designed to provide skills to people
vital for economic growth.
•More education does not necessarily result in economic growth.
References:
•Schultz argued that skills and knowledge are forms of capital – increasing spending on education meant
an
investment in people and the more governments spent on education, the more skilled the workforce would
become, and the more economically beneficial individuals will they become (human capital).
•Halsey et al argued that the Tripartite system of education fail to deliver genuine equality of opportunity
to all students hence the majority of children who attend secondary modern schools failed to develop their
potentials and thus do not have the same opportunities as those who attend either grammar or technical
schools.
• Halsey (1961) argues that education has major role in the economic growth in modern industrial societies
where there is a relatively high demand for high skill professionals.
•Kate Millet (1970), a radical feminist argued that there was a link between education and patriarchy hence
educational inequalities influence economic ones for example, females tend to study humanities subject
that are low paying in the future as compared to the field of sciences and math that males are encouraged
to study.
•Alison Wolff (2002) analyzed the educational expenditure and rate of economic growth of various
countries, there is found no solid relation between growth in economy and spending on education. For
example, Switzerland is one of the strongest economies in the world with a higher per capita yet the
expenditure of education is surprisingly low in comparison to Egypt, the country that largely spent on their
educational system in between 1980-1995 yet failed to financially progress.
