Sociology of Education: Functionalist vs Marxist

• Sociologists use different perspectives to analyse education, offering contrasting views of its role in society.
• Functionalists view education as beneficial, contributing to social cohesion and stability.
• Marxists view education as serving capitalism by reproducing class inequality.
• Both Functionalist and Marxist perspectives on education will be explored, evaluating strengths and weaknesses in relation to AQA A-Level Sociology.

Functionalist Perspective on Education

• Functionalism views society as a system of interrelated parts working together to maintain stability.
• Functionalists see education performing essential functions benefiting individuals and society.

Émile Durkheim (1903) – Social Solidarity & Specialist Skills

• Education helps create social solidarity by instilling shared norms and values.
• Schools act as a miniature society, teaching students cooperation and discipline.
• Education provides specialised skills for the division of labour in modern economies.
• Hargreaves (1982) argues schools encourage individual competition rather than social solidarity.
• Durkheim's view may be outdated because modern economies require diverse and creative skills, not those taught in schools.

Talcott Parsons (1961) – Meritocracy & Role Allocation

• Education acts as a bridge between family and wider society, preparing children for adult roles.
• Schools socialize children into universalistic standards, replacing the particularistic values of home.
• Education operates as a meritocracy, where success is based on effort and ability, not social background.
• Bowles & Gintis (1976) challenge the idea of meritocracy, and claim success is influenced by social class, gender, and ethnicity.
• Marxists argue the education system legitimizes inequality by making failure seem like an individual's fault rather than a structural issue.

Davis & Moore (1945) – Role Allocation & Social Stratification

• The education system functions as a sorting mechanism, ensuring the most talented individuals reach the most important roles in society.
• High rewards motivate individuals to work towards qualifications.
• This creates a productive and efficient workforce suited to societal needs.
• Critics argue social class and privilege, rather than ability often determine access to high-status jobs.
• High levels of graduate underemployment suggest the system doesn't always allocate roles based on merit.

Schultz (1971) – Human Capital Theory

• Education is an investment in human capital, improving skills and knowledge to benefit the economy.
• A highly skilled workforce increases national productivity and economic growth.
• Marxists argue that education does not serve all individuals equally and prioritizes the needs of capitalism over students' development.

Marxist Perspective on Education

• Marxism is a conflict theory that views education is used by the ruling class to maintain control and reproduce class inequality.

Louis Althusser (1971) – Education as an Ideological State Apparatus (ISA)

• Education is part of the Ideological State Apparatus, which transmits ruling-class ideology.
• Schools legitimize class inequality by teaching students that the social hierarchy is fair and natural.
• Education supports capitalism.
• Fails to explain why some working-class students resist schooling and succeed despite disadvantages.

Bowles & Gintis (1976) – The Correspondence Principle & Myth of Meritocracy

• Schools mirror workplace hierarchies, preparing students to accept exploitation in the labour market.
• The hidden curriculum teaches obedience, punctuality, and acceptance of authority.
• The myth of meritocracy convinces people that success is based on ability, rather than privilege, preventing rebellion against capitalism.
• Provides strong evidence of how education reproduces class inequalities.
• Fails to explain why some working-class students challenge authority and succeed.

Bourdieu (1984) – Cultural Capital

• Middle-class students benefit from possessing cultural capital, which includes language skills, knowledge, and social norms valued by schools.
• The education system rewards this middle-class habitus, disadvantaging working-class students.
• Explains differences in educational success between social classes.
• Measuring cultural capital precisely is difficult.

Paul Willis (1977) – Learning to Labour

• Unlike Bowles & Gintis, Willis found that working-class 'lads' resisted school authority through an anti-school subculture.
• Ultimately their resistance led them into low-paid, working-class jobs, reproducing social class inequalities.
• Shows students are not passive recipients of ruling-class ideology.
• A small sample size limits generalizability.

Comparison of Functionalism and Marxism

• Functionalism creates social solidarity and teaches necessary skills, whereas Marxism serves capitalism by reproducing class inequality.
• Functionalism ensures the best individuals get the best jobs (meritocracy), whereas Marxism prepares working-class students for low-paid, obedient work.
• Functionalism transmits shared norms and values, but Marxism enforces the ruling-class ideology through the hidden curriculum.
• Critics argue education is not always meritocratic, and not all students conform to ruling-class ideology.

Conclusion

• The Functionalist perspective presents education as a meritocratic institution benefiting society through social cohesion and workforce preparation.
• Marxists argue that education maintains class inequalities, benefiting the ruling class while keeping the working class in subordinate positions.
• Both perspectives offer insights into education, but do not explain its complexity fully.
• A comprehensive approach might consider elements of both perspectives, recognizing that education can reinforce inequalities and provide opportunities for social mobility.

Test your knowledge of sociological perspectives on education. Questions cover Marxist and Functionalist views, role allocation, social solidarity, and the hidden curriculum. Explore the debate on meritocracy and the function of education in society.