Sociology of Education - Interactions and Marxism - Essay Example

Title: Sociology of Education - Interactions & Marxism (conflict theory) Sociology is a social science. The word Sociology is a combination of the term “Socio-“ which is derived from the Latin word socius which means people in general and the suffix “-logy” which means “study of”. So we can define Sociology as the study of Society or human civilization. It examines the human social interactions within the society. It is related to and review’s terms such as organizations, associations, groups, institutions or then individuals as a whole. Though the science is new in comparison to other disciplines the base of this study is quite old. 1 Sociology has many sub fields like social stratification, political sociology, criminology, Sociology of gender and others. Sociology of Education is yet another relevant field of Sociology. Sociology of Education studies how social institutions and individual experiences influence the human social development and the education system. Education is always regarded as a positive human effort for the development and improvement of the society or human civilization. Today education is a mean for having power, wealth and status. The main aim though is to achieve equality standards in society which means that an individual would be developed to his or her thorough potential which allows them with a chance to accomplish the maximum in life with respect to their abilities. However this visualization is not met. Sociologists have said that education has a larger perspective whose idea is to maintain social stability. Here we have discussed in detail the two perspectives Marxism and interactionism and analyzed them in details In the second half we have learnt about Education and Social class. How Marxism and interactionism see education as an institution from their perspective and points they cover. Analysis and conclusion of the same has been done in details with examples Body: Define and discuss the two perspectives in detail and locate within the debate of structure / action, micro / macro. We may look forward at the two perspectives of Educational psychology the Interactionist and Marxism. Interactionism is one of the major theoretical viewpoints in sociology. The Interactionist perspective is a general name that is specified to a group of sociological perspectives. These perspectives are mainly made up of three main variations • Symbolic Interaction. • Phenomenology. • Ethnomethodology. George Herbert Mead from the Chicago school of sociology was the founder of interactionism though Herbert Blumer, who studied with Mead at the University of Chicago, is in charge for inventing the term, "symbolic interactionism," and creating the most major version of the theory. According to Symbolic Interaction human actions are controlled by the meanings that actors give to their situations, and that these meanings are established in interactions.2 In other words human beings are practical actors who continuously adjust their behavior according to others actions. This is possible only because we are able to interpret these actions which are significant in the socially constructed world. For example: In a traffic signal when a red light goes on people stop. Here we interpret this red signal as a sign for us to stop. Here we also have to take in consideration that the red signal is sign that is significant in our world. These perspectives interpret humans as active and creative by which the social world is created. They disbelief in the passive, compliant objects of socialization. As the interactions in these perspective are on a small scale i.e. between individuals or small groups these perspectives are referred to micro level of sociological analysis. This theory mainly centers on the subjective features of social life or easily observable face to face interaction, instead of the objective, macro-structural characteristics of social systems which include social institutions. The reason for this focal point is that interactionists support their theoretical viewpoint on their image of humans, rather than on their image of society as the functionalists or Marxist do. Marxism: There are always some typical questions in our society like why are some people rich and the others poor? Is this the right way of for things to be and whether the society stratum has to be this way itself? Karl Heinrich Marx who was a German philosopher, political economist, and socialist revolutionary has tried to find these answers. He in his study which is termed Marxism (against his name) has tried to figure out the work of or capitalist society, for whom it works better and for whom it works worse. He has studied on how feudalism arose and where it may lead the society. According to Marx there are two main classes in the socio economic structure of the society. First class is the one who owns the productive resources which is termed as the capitalist and the second class is that of the workers, for who work is a matter of survival. This class is termed as Proletariats. In short we can say that Marxism is the scrutiny of the complex and emergent relations amid the two classes. 3 Marxism is based on certain firm Ideas: First is the mode of production: It is a mixture of productive forces and social and technical relation of production. The second is the base and superstructure. According to Marx the base establishes the superstructure. Here base is referred to the means of production in society while Superstructure is on top of base and includes society’s philosophy, its legal system, political system and religions. This correlation between the base and superstructure is believed to be a dialectical one. The third is the class consciousness which refers to how a social class knows it self well and maintains its own logical or rational interest. The fourth point is the ideology: As the ruling class influences the society’s means of production the ideology will be decided according to the ruling class. So we can say ideology of a society is very important keeping in mind the alienated groups which may become confused otherwise and may lead in commodity fetishism. The fifth point is historical materialism Human make continues efforts to make the means of life which affect the economic base of society. The sixth point is political economy. It examines the methods of production, specifically capital, and how this exhibits itself in economic activity The seventh point exploitation: It is a natural feature and a main element of capitalism and free market. Here the main focus is to make profit by paying workers less than full value of the labor. The last point is alienation which is characteristic of human nature. According to Marx alienation is an efficient result of capitalism Let’s discuss in detail the link and contrast between these two perspectives. Both the perspectives have a long rational history which began with Max Weber the German sociologist and George H. Mead the American philosopher. Both these scholars gave emphasis on the subjective meaning of human behavior, social processes and practicality. But if we see in details Marxism and interactionist perspective lie on different tracks altogether. For ex: While studying the social structure Marxism’s base and superstructure system gives major emphasis on dialects than too characteristics between actual individuals like that in Interactionism. In Interactionist perspective the main stress is given on individual while Marxist believes in power like economic power, political power or ideological power. They believe that order is present in society because the powerful social groups or the upper classes enforce a sense of order in society. They do not believe in the concept of ‘society’ being over ‘humans’. They do not perceive society as a living thing. According to Marxists people are the ones who create structures within which the behaviour is ordered so if people make these orders they are also capable to change it. 4 In other words according to interactionists the main theme or base of the perspective is individual but according to Marxists individuals are significant only when they come together to form a class. In fact if seen in details interactionists fail to point out or explain points like social structure, social order and social change which Marxism in its own way has explained. Body: Select a topic - 'social class and education' that is informed theoretically and empirically by the perspectives (ensure that these are evidenced with some original information and reading from current sources especially journals, newspaper articles). The topic Social class and education is gaining a lot of attention from sociologists around the world. We can see education from two view points that of the interactionist and that of the Marxist. The Interactionist point of view will be based on Micro theories or study of individuals, small group or how the interaction between these leads to changes in education system while the Marxist point of view will be based on Macro theories which will be the stud of large institutions or groups or societies. Example class conflict, gender race ethnicity etc. Both these points have been discussed below. According to Interactionist theory the interactions between a teacher and student or between students itself can affect the students performance. For example let’s take a case where a student likes the mathematics teacher and dislikes the history teacher. Because of this liking he may perform well in mathematics but may fail to achieve good grades in history. From this example we can see that a person’s performance may vary due to the interactions in his personal life. This example is true for the higher education class in UK. Academics are looking at Pupil as mere fellows who are given an immense curriculum which indirectly is building up pressure. This has lead to trouble in the teacher-student relationship due to the immense pressure and expectations created. The demand from the teachers to fulfill the academic expectation is the reason for a strain in between the student and teacher. This pressure is also leading students to quit the program5 The other example we can state is between students. If the classroom has students of better quality there may be a good or quality interaction which in turn may lead to healthy competition between students. This may result in better grades. Vice versa if a classroom has more of faulty or disobedient students the class room atmosphere may get affected which may lead to poor grades from intelligent students too. Peer pressure is also a topic to be considered in education.6 The other point to be specified here that of the ‘typing’ expression in interactionism which is based on the labeling theory. Typing is referred to the way teachers categorize students. For example: categorizing students in good, bad, intelligent etc. This typing may make students the way they are labeled. For example: a student may be good in studies (intelligent) and also naughty at the same time. If he is labeled naughty he may interpret the same and pay more attention to this self or image of his which may in turn subside his scholarly nature. According to the constructivism theory which compliments the Interactionism theory, knowledge is the outcome of the learner’s incorporation of new information and insight of the prior knowledge he has. According to Marxist the class structure is supposed to be a crucial factor for success in school. We can explain this point by the study conducted by University College London and Kings College London. In this study they believe that children’s progress is dependent on the social class rather than the school they go or how well the student is. ‘It appears to show what has often been said, but never proved: that the current league tables measure not the best, but the most middle-class schools; and that the Government's 'value-added' tables fail to take account of the most crucial factor in educational outcomes - a pupil's address’.7 According to the repot which was matched with almost 1 million pupils states that the main factor of a students academic performance is his social background and the schools success is based on the students class background. The main points to consider in this topic are: Young working class: Education is a very important institution of the society. Good educated people lead to a better country. But this sector of young working class has created a chaos in the education system. Many people opt out of education system to earn money. Usually children from poor class or working class fall prey to this young working condition. Again here we can see the Marxist point of class consciousness where the upper class goes for higher education as it can maintain its interest. 8 Social class in the educational sector: Social background or class plays an important role in child’s success. According to the study conducted by the British Medical Journal in August 2002 poverty and social deprivation are the main points for difference in children’s achievements. This point supports the Marxists thought where importance is given to class. And it is stated that the upper class rules. For ex: According to study by academics at the Bristol University Fewer Children from poor backgrounds attend less of the grammar school than their well heeled peers though they may be just as clever. 9 Participation of higher education: It is clearly seen that though pupils with the same intelligence level get their education the upper class pupils have the chance to participate in higher education. Social class gender/race ethnicity: It is believed that gender or race differences are being followed in UK from years. For example it is believed that when girls and boys are taught in separate schools the performance is better. But recent studies do not agree with this point. Alan Smithers, director of the Centre for Education and Employment Research at the University of Buckingham, has reviewed ten years of international and national research, and according to him the outcome of the research does not justify this point. The other point here specified by sociologist is that inequality within education has more of biological bases than cultural basis. This point is proved by the fact that girls mature earlier than boys but when the age reaches 16 boys again dominate girls in academics. 10 School choice: The choice of the school also affects the performance of a student. For example schools are chosen according to standards of society. The cream layer usually gets the best schools while working classes have regular schools. The categorization of schools have been according to categorization of classes Relationship between families and school: Family plays an important role in schooling of a person. The occupation and status of families are continued to generations. The parent’s financial background makes an important decision in a child’s education. The other things that matter to the Childs attitude are the viewpoint and reactions of parent to institutions. Here we are discussing of education as an institution. Here we can see interactionist view where the child is learning or interpreting things from his family. Analysis: Compare and contrast this evidence in relation to the chosen perspectives and other perspectives eg enthomethodology etc. All the perspectives portray Education as a very influential positive pressure on students. It is seen that education measures up people to the norms and values of the Society. According to Marxist Education is the outcome of a capitalistic society in which an employer needs a worker. According to Marxists Samuel Bowles and Herbert Gintis, schools are based on layers of authorities or systems and are hierarchical. Let’s explain the hierarchy in two steps that of the teacher who gives order and the other layer of the student who obeys it. 11 While Functionalists believe that education can guide to social harmony, steadiness and social integration. Emile Durkeim a French Functionalist like society is a bigger aspect school is a smaller version of society and teaches its pupils how to work with others people in social context. In Functionalism it is believed that opportunities are given to everyone regardless of their class or status to learn and be successful in school. Therefore it is believed that schooling and whatever is going on in school is an outcome of the people in it and it is up to them to decide their own progress irrespective of their social class. Functionalist point out that education performs two main functions: Economic function in which pupil are trained and work harder for the economic growth and second is the Social point of view in which social values and norms are transmitted from generation to generation. Here the hidden curriculum plays an important role in which people are taught to be loyal citizens of future. They are encouraged for the sense of national identity. Young people are incorporated in roles as workers. Here it is proved by functionalists that education is all about hard work and efforts taken. So it contrasts with the point that school and the scenario of school is not a cause of social class. They also deny the system based on ability by saying that it is a myth. (The same point is explained in details below) Let’s discuss in details the grouping of pupils by means of ability. Studies have shown that grouping people by ability does not affect the performance of students. In contract it can create a negative effect on lower ability people. It results in negative attitude, less motivation and lower self esteem of such pupils. Fact states that pupils from working class families and summer born children face the disadvantage of this system.12 But according to other research Setting has created deprived conditions of education for disadvantaged students. According to Professor Dylan Williams (Britain's leading assessment experts) setting system harms pupil from disadvantaged background that are put in bottom sets. In his research he saw that students who are placed in top math’s set score about 3 grades higher at GCSE. But if they were placed in the bottom set the results would be negative. Another research by professor Williams and Hannah Bartholomew found a large difference in the progress of pupils with similar ability according to set in which they are placed. The results showed that pupil from the top set achieved better than they were expected while the bottom set scored poorer than expected. 13 Some previous researchers have also said that the teachers in the lower sets were less qualified and expected less form the pupil. Though there are contrast between the two perspectives but both Marxists and Functionalists use macro theories which see education and other parts of social system on a large scale and that they study the relationship between the two. They do not believe in individual. According to both Marxists and functionalist schools explain and look into social inequality. Marxist on this point comment by addressing threat to social stability. They explain or conclude this point by saying that inequality should be acceptable or justified. 14 As we have discussed earlier about the myth that education offers everyone an equal chance is arguable here. The same argument was put forth by Bowles and Gintis. According to functionalist social mobility can be seen on a positive ground or upward scale for the people having the ability. But Marxist completely disagrees with this fact. They believe that education standards are aggregated according to the class. According to them education confirm the class of origin and the class of destinations. For them education adds to the reproduction of class inequality between generations and is a negative for upward social mobility. A detailed study of education in UK according to Marxist view is explained further. If we analyze the education system in detail we may see that despite the education gains in UK the social mobility has declined. The rise in higher education is the main cause for this. In this it is found that the poor class children have less chances of getting the better social standards despite the belief that more educational opportunities may prove beneficial to people of all backgrounds. Though the point of equal opportunity children from higher class families have gained more than the children of poor class which in turn is affecting the social mobility. This proves the Marxist point of view where class is given exceptional importance. According to interactionists individual point of view in the education system is important. It stresses on the point that the surrounding, family and relationships in school leads to performance in education The next point we may discuss in the barbarism found in middle-class families. Better off parents are seen separating their children from others who are thought to be inferior socially as well as intellectually. If we see in details from the interactionist point of view because of peer pressure or labeling the “other” students may not perform well as they are categorized and they interpret themselves to be inferior. While the pupils from middle class background are subjected to think that they are superior which leads them to better standards of study. If we take into consideration the Marxist point of view pupil from poor class have low self-esteem and feel alienated and they also get low standards of teaching which in turn results in not being properly educated. According to Ethnomethodology it stresses on the point that our day to day life interactions will influence our interactions in future. For example the teaching background in Specialist schools has lead to more value of students than the ordinary schools. Research (published by technology college trust) has shown specialist schools have performed 4% better in the GCSEs than what was expected. This research was lead by Professor David Jesson of the University of York. It contradicts to the point that the specialist school achieved good results because they got in the able population. 15 If we take into consideration the participation of higher education we can see that the poor class is deprived of this education while the upper class gets its advantage (Marxism point of view).This can be proved by the study of Barbara Jefferies a researcher of Institute of child health London. She studied on need for efforts to be taken to tackle childhood deprivation. The results showed that social background effected the cognitive development which leads to deprivation in children. The team studied nearly 11,000 children between 3rd March and 9th march 1958. They were tested on their ability in math’s, reading and other abilities following the ages seven, eleven, and sixteen. The team analyzed that the gap for education attainment widened as the children grew up and was the maximum at 33 which affected the Higher education strata. The conflict theory has a different outlook to education. It believes that both pupil and educators (universities, schools etc.) have their own interest. The educators usually are interested in gaining economic terms while pupils are interested in gaining knowledge for which they have to pay. Though the situation shows conflict it is better for both to co-operate and exchange what they have. Problem occurs when either of the side has less or is biased because of class. Conclusion: Discuss how more current reading has informed this topic in a generic sense (structure / action, micro / macro) and conclusion of main arguments. Though all the perspectives have a different angel each perspective is right in its own term. The system works with a combination of all the perspectives where it is proved that class does affect the education system or maybe the point that individual interaction or perceptions may lead to better educational performance or poor educational standards. Both Micro and Macro point of view have been necessary in this set up of education. We have argued on the point whether class is a factor that influences education system. To some extent we may agree to this point. To prove this point we may take in the context of the article in TES 24th November. Here they have found that when disadvantaged students were sent to affluent schools their grades were affected positively. The outcome or results of the analysis supports the labors plan which intends to open middle class schools for the poor class. The other agenda of poverty and social deprivation leading to difference in children’s achievement also has a base which can be proved by the study conducted by the British Medical Journal in August 2002. Though the Functionalists belief that education can guide to social harmony, steadiness and social integration is also not fake. It can lead to upward mobility if education system follows its main purpose to teach and not economic gain. In all as the conflict theory suggests that both micro and macro theories are important for an institution and Social structures are an result of struggles and bargain between people with different interest and different possessions or resources. It sees the micro-level of individual action and the macro-level of social structure related to each other.      References:  1. Rob Moore, 2004, Polity Press , Society, Education and Issues and Explanations in the Sociology of Education, Cambridge 2. Blumer, Herbert. 1969. Symbolic Interactionism: Perspective and Method. Englewood Cliffs, Prentice-Hall, NJ. 3. Garfinkel, Harold. 1967. Studies in Ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, Prentice-Hall, NJ. 4. Goffman, Erving. 1958. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Social Sciences Research Centre, Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh, 5. Development Studies and the Marxists, Essay by Henry Bernstein, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London 6. Streaming, setting and grouping by ability, by Laura Suknandan with Barbara Lee, NFER 7. Social class is crucial factor in school achievement, Guardian, 28 February 2006 8. Social background holds key to child's success, Guardian, 9 August 2002 9. Research shows class still rules, TES, 21 April 2000 10. Streaming's return brings class divide ,TES, 22 September 2006 11. Rich dominate grammars, TES 3rd September 2004 12. Success of single-sex schools is 'down to selection, not gender', Times 26th June, 2006 13. Setting "barbarism" is fault of middle-class parents, TES march 14th 2003. 14. Specialist schools add significant value, TES 3rd May 2002. 15. http://www.literacytrust.org.uk/socialinclusion/socialexclusion.html#counts – viewed December 21, 2006 16. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociology, viewed December 20, 2006 17. http://www94.homepage.villanova.edu/peter.knapp/THgreats.htm, viewed December 20, 2006 18. http://web.grinnell.edu/courses/soc/s00/soc111-01/IntroTheories/Symbolic.html viewed December 21, 2006 19. http://www.sociology.org.uk/index.htm viewed December 21, 2006 20. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociology_of_education, viewed December 20, 2006 21. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociology_of_education viewed December 21, 2006 22. http://www.abbeyclock.com/cecil/134.html, viewed December 20, 2006 23. http://www.studentcentral.co.uk/compare_contrast_marxist_functionalist_approaches_32216/ viewed December 21, 2006   Read More