Sociology (9699) | Education and society

Welcome to Paper 3: Education and Society!

Hi there! This chapter is vital for understanding how the education system works, not just as a place to learn, but as a crucial player in shaping society, power, and inequality. Don't worry if some of the theories seem challenging—we'll break them down using clear analogies.

In this section, you will learn about: the sociological theories explaining the role of schools, the link between education and social mobility, how the curriculum is influenced, and why some social groups achieve better educational results than others (inequality).

Section 5: Education and Society

5.1 Theories about the Role of Education

Sociologists look at education through different lenses to understand its main purpose:

1. Functionalist Views (Consensus Perspective)

Functionalists believe society is like a body: every part (like education, family, or the economy) must work together harmoniously for the good of the whole.

• Value Consensus and Social Solidarity: Education acts as a miniature society, teaching students shared norms and values (like respect for authority and hard work). This creates social solidarity (unity and togetherness).
• Example: Durkheim argued that teaching history links individuals to society's past, fostering a sense of shared identity.
• Role Allocation: Education sorts people based on their ability, ensuring the most talented end up in the most important jobs. This is essential for a productive economy.
• Meritocracy: They believe the system is meritocratic, meaning achievement is based purely on effort and ability, not background. (We will debate this later!)

2. Marxist Views (Conflict Perspective)

Marxists see education as a tool used by the ruling class (bourgeoisie) to maintain the power of the capitalist system and keep the working class (proletariat) oppressed.

• Reproduction of the Capitalist System: Schools prepare students for life in the factory or office by instilling discipline, obedience, and punctuality—the skills needed for compliant workers.
• Ideological Control and Cultural Reproduction: Education spreads the dominant ideology, making the capitalist system seem fair and inevitable. They teach that failure is the individual's fault (hiding the inequalities of the system).
• Key Theorists: Althusser called education an Ideological State Apparatus (ISA), spreading the ruling class ideology. Bowles and Gintis proposed the Correspondence Principle, arguing that school structure (hierarchy, boredom, rewards) mirrors the workplace structure.

3. New Right and Social Democratic Views

• New Right: Focuses on marketisation and competition. They believe the state should only provide a basic framework, and schools should compete like businesses to raise standards and meet the needs of the economy (producing skilled workers).
• Social Democratic: Focuses on the role of education in providing equal opportunity and tackling poverty. They see education as a crucial way to improve the economy by investing in human capital (the skills and knowledge of the workforce).

5.2 Education and Social Mobility

Social mobility is the movement of individuals or groups between different social positions (e.g., a working-class child becoming a doctor). Education is often seen as the main engine of upward mobility.

• Equal Opportunity and Meritocracy: The ideal is that everyone, regardless of background, should have the same chance to succeed (equal opportunity), leading to a true meritocracy where only talent determines status.
• The Reality: Sociologists debate the extent to which education systems are truly meritocratic today. Evidence suggests that class, ethnicity, and gender still heavily influence attainment, questioning the fairness of the system.
• Life Chances: Educational success significantly affects an individual's life chances (the opportunities they have in life, such as income, health, and job security). Under-achievement often leads to poorer life chances for the individual and economic problems (skill shortages) for society.

5.3 Influences on the Curriculum

The curriculum is what is formally taught in schools. Sociologists argue that knowledge itself is not neutral—it is socially constructed.

• Factors Influencing Content: Curriculum content is influenced by power (who decides what counts as important knowledge), culture, economic demands (vocational training), and gender (which subjects are seen as 'male' or 'female').
• Cultural Reproduction: The curriculum often reinforces the culture and values of the dominant group.
• The Ethnocentric Curriculum: This curriculum prioritises one ethnic culture (usually the dominant majority) while ignoring or devaluing others. Example: Focusing primarily on European history or literature in a multicultural society.
• The Gendered Curriculum: The way subjects are packaged or promoted can reinforce traditional gender roles (e.g., technical subjects being marketed primarily to boys).
• The Hidden Curriculum: This refers to the unstated lessons, norms, and values that students learn simply by being in the education system (e.g., discipline, timing, respect for hierarchy). Marxists argue this prepares students for exploitation.
• Cultural Capital (Bourdieu): This concept refers to the knowledge, attitudes, language, tastes, and abilities that the middle and upper classes possess. This "capital" is rewarded by the education system, giving middle-class students an automatic advantage over working-class students whose culture is devalued.

Section 6: Education and Inequality

This section examines why certain social groups consistently underperform compared to others, focusing on explanations related to intelligence, social class, ethnicity, and gender.

6.1 Intelligence and Educational Attainment

Don't worry, this topic is tricky even for experts!

• Defining Intelligence: It is extremely difficult to define intelligence sociologically. Is it IQ score? Emotional maturity? Ability to navigate society? Sociologists argue that definitions are often culturally biased.
• IQ Tests and Social Factors: While IQ tests claim to measure innate ability, sociologists point out they are often influenced by social factors like cultural knowledge and language skills (linking back to cultural capital). A test asking about historical figures from a specific culture will disadvantage those unfamiliar with that culture.
• Intelligence and Attainment: Sociologists generally agree that while intelligence plays a role, social factors (like class, parental education, and school resources) often have a far greater influence on actual educational attainment than raw, measurable intelligence.

6.2 Social Class and Educational Attainment

Social class is historically the biggest predictor of educational success. Explanations fall into two categories:

1. Material Factors (External to School)

These relate to economic resources and physical environment:

• Poverty and Diet: Poor nutrition or unstable housing can lead to illness, fatigue, and lack of concentration, impacting attendance and focus.
• Lack of Resources: Working-class families often cannot afford extra tuition, educational trips, or quiet study spaces (e.g., reading complex books at home is harder in overcrowded housing).
• Fear of Debt: Working-class students may choose to leave education sooner to avoid the financial burden of higher education.

2. Cultural Explanations (External to School)

These focus on norms, values, and language used outside of school:

• Parental Attitudes: Some sociologists (e.g., Sugarman, associated with the controversial concept of cultural deprivation) argued that working-class culture prioritises immediate gratification (taking a job immediately) over deferred gratification (studying for a future reward). This view is often criticised as blaming the victim.
• Speech Codes (Bernstein): Bernstein differentiated between the restricted code (used by working-class speakers, simple vocabulary, context-bound) and the elaborated code (used by middle-class speakers, complex, context-free). The elaborated code is the language of textbooks and teachers, giving middle-class students an advantage.
• Cultural Capital: As discussed in 5.3, the culture and knowledge valued by schools belong to the middle class.

3. In-School Factors (Internal to School)

• Labelling (Becker): Teachers often label students based on stereotypes (e.g., working-class students seen as less motivated). These labels can become a self-fulfilling prophecy—the student internalises the label and acts accordingly, leading to under-achievement.
• Ability Grouping (Streaming/Setting): Working-class pupils are disproportionately placed into lower streams, which often provide lower quality teaching and access to less demanding curriculum content.
• Pupil Subcultures: Responses to labelling or streaming often result in subcultures. Lacey noted the process of differentiation (teachers separating students) and polarisation (students moving to pro- or anti-school poles). Working-class students often form anti-school subcultures, rejecting the school's values, which guarantees failure.
• Compensatory Education Programmes: These are policies designed to counteract cultural deprivation or material disadvantages by providing extra resources to disadvantaged areas (e.g., Head Start in the US).

6.3 Ethnicity and Educational Attainment

Educational attainment varies significantly between ethnic groups. Explanations include:

• Racism in Schools (Internal): This includes individual teacher racism (labelling, stereotyping) and institutional racism (where school policies or structures disadvantage certain groups, e.g., lack of focus on minority languages).
• Cultural Explanations (External):
  • Language Barriers: Students whose first language is not the language of instruction may face challenges initially.
  • Parental Attitudes: Some research suggests that certain minority ethnic groups place a very high value on education, compensating for material disadvantages (e.g., some Asian families).
• Ethnicity and Subcultures (Internal/External): Some subcultures (often formed as a response to perceived racism or marginalisation) may reject the school system, leading to under-achievement. However, positive subcultures focused on academic achievement also exist within minority groups.
• The Intersection of Class, Ethnicity, and Gender: It is vital to remember that ethnic differences are often magnified by social class. For instance, a working-class Black girl may face different challenges than a middle-class White boy. Sociologists must look at how these factors interact.

6.4 Gender and Educational Attainment

Historically, boys outperformed girls, but since the late 1980s, girls have generally overtaken boys in most educational measures, leading to debates about the 'crisis of masculinity.'

• Gender Socialisation (External): Girls are traditionally socialised to be quiet, organised, and conformist—traits that are often rewarded in the classroom environment. Boys are socialised to be competitive and disruptive, leading to clashes with school norms.
• Wider Social Changes (External):
  • Changing Female Expectations: Feminism and legal changes have led to greater ambition among women. They see educational achievement as the route to career success and financial independence.
  • Crisis of Masculinity: The decline of traditional manual jobs has left some working-class boys feeling uncertain about their future roles, potentially leading to lower motivation in school.
• Gender and Subcultures (Internal/External): Boys' subcultures often place a higher value on 'laddish' behaviour or anti-school activity, fearing academic work makes them look 'soft.' Girls' subcultures tend to be more pro-education.
• Teacher Expectations (Internal): Teachers may have more positive expectations of girls (seeing them as diligent) and spend more time reprimanding boys, reinforcing gendered behaviour in the classroom.