Open enrolment is another example of how the local administration of the education system has been weakened since 1979. Open enrolment is where there are no formal restrictions on the entry to a school or college; schools accept students of all abilities. The Education Reform Act of 1988 allows schools to recruit extra pupils if there is a demand rather than having a limit imposed by the local education authorities, which occurred before the act. Open enrolment was seen as away of rewarding successful schools and encouraging schools to bring about improvements. Under open enrolment parents can chose where they want their children to go to school. Schools only had a maximum amount of students as their limit. Before local authorities maintained the number of students in each school. Now schools need to respond to parents’ commands, this shows a weakening in the power of the local education authority.
b) Using information from the items and other sources, assess the Functionalist and Marxist approaches to the relationship between the education and the economy. (12 Marks)
Functionalist and Marxists both see a link between education and the economy. The Functionalist view is trying to seek to explain the existence of social structures by the role they perform for society as a whole. It is a structural theory, analysing the level of society rather than the individual. Each institution and individual has its own function to perform, if it doesn’t then it will affect the whole of society not just the individual. The Marxist view is conflict theory, the main argument is that the economy is the base of life and what controls the individual. The ruling class is the one with the highest paid jobs, best resources and most importantly the political and social power.
Talcott parsons, a functionalist, believes the education system serves an economic function. This function is selecting the most able students through examinations to do the best-paid jobs in society. The “best” jobs in society go to those who deserve them by trying hardest in the educational system. He believes it is a meritocracy. Other sociologists Davis and Moore see education as a process of role allocation within society. Those with the best ability will be allocated the best jobs, so they will occupy the best jobs in society. They say then most talented will succeed in the education system. It prepares the people for their role in society whilst allocating the most powerful jobs to those with the most ability. This shows a very strong link between education and the economy, because it shapes what the economy will be like in the future.
There are some criticisms of opinion, some Marxists say that is only a weak link between education achievement and the economy. Marxists believe that working classes are disadvantaged in the current education system. It is a fact that they are underachieving when compared to the middle class. But no one is certain, it is most probably a combination of the differences in culture, attitudes and resources. One possible explanation is the “hidden curriculum”. Marxists believe it is that the education system is teaching the pupils to be subservient and obey the figures of authority and the working class counter act this so they underachieve.
Bowles and Gintis, two Marxists believe there is a strong link between school and the economy. These are a requirement of industrial capitalism, they argue that the education system reflects and is organised just like the like the world of work in a capitalist society. This according to them is the fragmentation of most work is mirrored in the “breaking up of the curriculum” into subjects and topics. The lack of control over work for the individual is reflected in the powerlessness of pupils over what they learn and how. Bowles and Gintis describe another very important link between the educational system and the economy. The link is one of correspondence, the economy in a capitalist society is built on the exploitation of the many by the few. So the school is based on the subordination of students to the teachers. The teachers regard them not a equals and they are not judged in terms of their ability but on their willingness to conform and do what they are told.
Functionalists agree with this, but they think that everything is based on effort, achievement and merit. Those with the least skills in industry are paid less than those with many skills. The school shows who has the most skills and who doesn’t.
There are criticisms of both approaches toward school and the economy. The criticism of the Marxist approach is that it is a determined theory, with little freedom for individuals. It is wrong to emphasise on how the conflict produces social order, which is a characteristic in any society: those with power and those without. The criticism of the functionalist approach is that it stresses order as an expense of conflict. It focuses on the structural elements and ignores the individual.
There is a lot of evidence given by both the Marxists and Functionalists. Approaches to the relationship between the education system and the economy. The link is more complex than either make out and is most likely a combination of both approaches. There are some doubts raised by sociologists about the research and techniques used by the sociologist.
c) Define and explain what is meant by the term “hidden curriculum”. (Item A) (6 Marks)
The hidden curriculum is all those things taught and learned in the education system which do not from part of the formal program of subjects and courses. In particular it refers to the values, beliefs and attitudes which pupils learn alongside the knowledge and skills of the formal curriculum. The messages delivered from the hidden curriculum have a derived from the hidden curriculum have a powerful influence on the pupils’ behaviour and their progress or lack of it at school.
It describes how school passes on values, attitudes and habits. From there is a mention of how a school works as a smaller society and reinforcing variations in cultural values acquired in early life. When a child leaves school this hidden curriculum of education has the effect of limiting opportunities for some whilst offering more for others. This is how school shape and mould children through the hidden curriculum to help them function in society.
Some example of the “subjects” learnt from the hidden curriculum are the suitable type of behaviour in different situations, respecting rules and figure of authority, discipline an working as a team. Others are being punctual, obeying rules and confident. The role of the hidden curriculum is to give those children students what they need to function correctly in modern society.
The hidden curriculum is sector in the modern education of children. The school is now seen as a microcosm of society. So school is the beginning of the person’s life and their role within it. The school carries the child out of the family into the society. The hidden curriculum is the method and extra taught in education to benefit the pupils later in life.
The hidden curriculum sub consciously teaches the children the values they will need in the world of work, such as being subservient or obeying figures of authority. Having said this there isn’t another way to do things, schools have to have rules and authority figures. There would be chaos if students didn’t have to do what teaches say, obey the rules and get to lessons on time. There isn’t any other way it could be done without teaching the pupils these values whilst still keeping the school working.
e) The concept of the self-fulfilling prophecy described in Item B has been criticised by some sociologists. Identify three ways in which the concept might be criticised. (6 Marks)
The self-fulfilling prophecy is the labels given to pupils based on the judgements made by teachers and how the pupils will react to them weather they know about them or not. These labels could be “bright”, “able”, “thick”, “less able”, “practical” or “academic”. However, these labels vary from pupil to pupil and teacher to teacher. The self-fulfilling prophecy is a statement about a pupil which in turn makes that out come true because of the statement. The concept is obviously closely linked to labelling and is used particularly in the education system. The self-fulfilling prophecy is argued by making a prediction or statement, for example “these pupils will do well because they are brightest in the class”. Those in the position of influence will act as though the prediction was already true, the teachers would have high expectations of the pupils and in turn interact with them differently. Therefore reinforcing the label and making it happen.
A criticism of the self-fulfilling prophecy is that is it wholly based on the judgements of teachers, ad every teacher isn’t going to have the judgements and labels. This is based on the stereotypical view of teachers. These usually result in the labelling of pupils. Teaching methods have changed over the years and this means there are less judgements being made by teachers and they are more varied than described.
Another criticism of it is that saying someone is intelligent or less able doesn’t make it so and how are teachers supposed to assess pupils without giving them labels. A pupil’s intelligent is fully dictated by teachers’ labels. It relies on how they socialise and are interacted with. Different teachers will interact with pupils differently. They might also act on labels with opposite affect, for example giving the less able students more time and disproving the idea of a self-fulfilling prophecy.
There is an assumption that all pupils will react in the same way to the label they have been given and how the teachers treat them. Everyone is different and they respond in different ways. Hargreaves (1975) argued whether a label “sticks” or not depends on a number of different factors. The factors may be how often they are labelled, whether the pupil considered the teacher’s opinion, the extent the labelling took place: private or public. Bird (1980) found some types of label are more readily accepted than others. “Academic” labels, in terms of ability were more readily accepted than “behavioural” labels in terms of conduct.
The self-fulfilling prophecy is simplifying a relatively complex idea, it relies on a number of factors and how the teachers and pupils respond to it. It implies that all pupils and teachers will react in the same way to the same labels under different circumstances.
f) To what extent do you agree that teachers judgements of pupils cause of under-achievement in schools? Refer to the Items and other evidence in you answer (12 Marks)
Teachers judgements affect pupils and their achievements or underachievement in the education system. Item B, “A Conceptual Approach” by Tony Lawson, tells of how teachers make judgements on pupils ability, based on many different things. Teachers make these labels on knowledge of what type of pupil is “good” and which is “bad” this means that teachers judge pupils on widespread judgements. It has been shown that teachers have stereotypes linked to gender, class and race. Teachers are said to act upon these judgements on the basis of stereotypes. For example pupils labelled “more able” are given more time to answer questions than those who are seen as less likely to know the answer.
In item C Kate Reynolds says that the role of the teacher is defined as an agent on of social control. They are important in assessing the role of the hidden curriculum in maintaining gender inequality. It describes how teachers’ attitudes towards the roles of education for men and women will influence their relationship with students. Spender found that in mixed schools two-thirds of the teachers’ time thus benefiting from the attention and distracting the time spent with girls.
Item D describes how although it is rare for teachers to display open racism, cultural differences and poor performances in some IQ tests by black children have created the belief that they are more likely to be slow learners. This can affect the methods teachers label black children effect how teacher interact with these children and affect their progress and achievements. This is potentially saying that subconscious labelling be teachers tends to be a disadvantage to black children.
Item E describes two obvious ways teachers’ judgements can have an impact on the social distribution of achievement. The first being teachers expectations can affect their assessments of pupils and their performance. The assessment of pupils reflect the teachers’ views of what middle class and other students should be capable of, opposed to their actual achievements. The second being, teachers may form lower expectations, make fewer attempts to make students get higher achievements. This says that teachers’ personal views are affecting what they think pupils are capable of achieving.
Item G describes how the comprehensive system has been criticised for “lowering standards” and not providing equality of opportunity for all. This would be because of the teachers making judgements about pupils from their background and therefore reproducing the “tripartite system under one roof”. This links the teachers’ judgements and labels with how well students from different social backgrounds achieve in the education system.
The items describe how the judgements made by teachers can affect the achievement of those students in the education system. The main cause of under achievement, however, is different depending on what researcher or study you read. Having said this, they all say that the teachers have a large influence how pupils perform in school. The teachers’ judgements are a large factor in underachievement in schools but it is not fully responsible. There a number of factors that can influence how a pupil achieves such as gender, class, race and most importantly it is down to the individual to decide how hard they work, how much effort they put in to school work, how they react to labels and criticisms.
g) Assess the extent to which home factors explain differential educational achievement between social classes. (16 Marks)
There are some clear differences between social class and achievement within the education system. Social classes are the divisions of people in a capitalist society, they are usually measured by wealth, income and career. The higher the class the richer the person or the more power they have. The middle classes are performing better in the education system and thus achieving more than the lower working classes.
Home factors could also play a large part in educational achievement between the different social classes. These factors could be the living conditions, material factors (money and resources), home environment (attitudes of family) and culture.
Environment and living conditions are factors affecting differential educational achievement between the social classes. This is because it can affect how a child feels and performs at school. A low working class income may have a lower standard of living than a higher middle class income. This could be worse housing, food, clothing, resources and less space. The living standards and conditions could have a large affect on educational progress. J.W.B. Douglas found that home circumstances played a crucial role in children’s success. For example overcrowding, lack of space to do home work, sharing a bed, diet and the immediate environment all significantly disadvantaged working class children. They can lead to poor concentration and attitude due to tiredness and malnutrition. This could well lead to illnesses and absence from school and lower the child’s chances of succeeding in the education system. Although this study was done in the 1960s so circumstances have changed since then so it may not be so relevant today. He doesn’t say how he measured parental interest, a parent may be very interested in how their child is doing, but they are to busy working or running the house to go into school often. But it some of the aspects will still apply and affect working class children. He found that the most important factor was the degree of parental interest shown. Middle class parents were three times more likely to visit the school to enquire about progress and show keen interest at home. The middle class parents have higher expectations of their children, like further education, so the children try harder to achieve.
One reason for this is the working classes attitude towards education, some may not see it as important or essential to get qualifications. The working class tends to have a lesser view of education than middle class does. There may be a general feeling that it is better to get a job and earn money rather than attend further education. The middle class tend to believe education is a good thing and so it is better to stay in the system as long as possible. By doing this they would achieve as much as possible and get good qualifications.
Another home factor is the resources and material possessions of the social classes. The working class children are more likely experience material deprivation (the lack of material possessions and resources) because their parents won’t have as big wages as middle class children. This means the middle class children have more money spent of them and their resources. They are more likely to have books, tutors, computers with educational software and the Internet. So they will learn more than the working class children will. This obviously gives middle class children an advantage over working class children. Therefore making them perform better and achieve more from the education system. The cost of further education will also put off working class children from staying education for as long as possible. This will deter them because they may not be ale to afford to send their children to college or university. This will affect educational achievement if the working class can only get G.C.S.E s they won’t try as hard because they don’t have to get into college or university. If they don’t try hard and put the effort in then they are much more likely to underachieve.
Cultural differences could also contribute to class differences in educational attainment. Middles class and working class families have different values, beliefs and attitudes. They could account for some of the differences in educational achievement. Culture is formed at home with the family, children will probably inherit their parents culture or a slight variation of it. Bordiue created the idea of a cultural capital, a dominant culture that rules society and is present in the education system. It is the middle class culture with their language, norms, values, beliefs and attitudes. It is taught in the school which disadvantages working class children and give the middle class an advantage. The working classes aren’t used to this dominant culture because it is different to what they are used to at home. They may not understand it or perform as well as they would if it was their culture. Working class may be culturally deprived. They may be deficient certain values and attitudes and skills essential for educational success. These could include a lack of ambition and motivation where neither parent or child thinks that succeeding is that important. They accept that they probably are going to achieve the best qualification and as a result they experience immediate gratification. Whereas the middle class as pushed toward deferred gratification so they get the highest qualification they can.
There are criticisms to how home factors explain differential educational achievement between social classes. One criticism is that there is no clear way to define class, there aren’t any objective to meet to be classed as working class or middle. The divisions have become blurred with the reduction of manual labour and manufacturing jobs. There has also been an increase in office jobs, making people middle class, who would’ve once been classed as working class. A large factor in educational achievement is IQ or intelligence. This isn’t really connected to home life, a culturally and materially deprived working class child can have a really high IQ. And middle class child could equally have a low IQ and underachieve in school. This mean Educational Achievement isn’t totally based on home factors because we have very little control over our IQs.
Home factors are important to the educational achievement to everyone, and differences in home factors create differences in educational achievement. Middle class children achieve more than working class children. This may be because of their home factors, but it can’t be the only factor. Many people have similar home lives and achieve totally different results. This means home factors aren’t the only reason for educational success or failure. Some of it is down to schools, teaching and individual attitudes, beliefs and ability. All of which have very little to do with the hoe factors. Having said this, the fact that there are differences in home lives and educational achievement between the social classes means that it must play a relatively important role with educational achievement. The attitudes of ones family and the conditions in which they live are controlled by their wealth, income and social class. The middle class has the “better” home factors with more culture, resources, positive attitudes towards school and high expectations so the children succeed more at school. Whereas the working class have “worse” so they succeed less and underachieve.
i) Evaluate sociological explanations of the “poor school progress” made by some children from West Indian and Asian homes (Item D). (12 Marks)
Item D refers to level of achievement at school by West Indian and Asian children which is lower than children from different backgrounds. Moore describes the achievement of and the factors producing poor performance in school from working class children and those from West Indian and Asian homes. He believes that they face the same difficulties and disadvantages as other working class children. But they have other problems to face as well. For many of these children English will not be the main language spoken at home. This makes it difficult to learn because they have to do everything in a “foreign” language. Although some West Indian children will speak English at home it is likely to be a different dialect from Standard English.
He also says it is rare for a teacher to be openly racist and knowingly discriminate against the children with cultural differences. But poor performances in some IQ tests by black children has created the view for some teachers that they will be slow learners or less able. This may influence the teachers’ attitudes and ultimately how they interact with the pupils and how well they teach. It may also create incorrect labels about those children. This may help to explain why these children make poor progress in school. Moore isn’t saying the teachers are racist but there may be a subconscious belief that they won’t progress as well as they should. This would obviously create label for the children and therefore change how the teachers teach them with negative results.
Some people believe that is due to intelligence, but this would imply that the children are making slow progress because of their background. This is technically racist so it isn’t agreed by most sociologists. Other explanations for the poor progress at school are the class room interactions, culture and other factor relating to culture such as culture capital or the hidden curriculum. Cultural differences and deprivation is the most likely cause from this. The children will probably have different religious beliefs, eat different food, have different beliefs from the majority of their peers. The education system is aimed at white culture through what is taught about religions and different countries. This makes it harder for students from different cultures to succeed as well as those from the dominant culture. They make poor school progress because they have a different culture than that of the school. Some will experience cultural and material deprivation as experienced by the working classes. They won’t have the same access to books, computers or other learning resources. They may also have a difficult family life, such as being brought up by a single parent, which gives them a disadvantage. Having said this, cultural differences aren’t the same as cultural deprivation. You may have a different cultural but it doesn’t make it deprived.
Although many sociological explanations have been offered to explain the poor school progress made by West Indian and Asian children. It is unlikely that it is the fault of any one thing. It is most probably a commination of several unique to each culture, home or child. All of the explanations are possible and could show the reasons for underachievement, but other are reasons for and against each one. Therefore is better to look at each one with caution. It has to be said that not all of the West Indian and Asian children in the education system are failing. Many are performing well and achieving more than people from the dominant culture. It is just that most are underachieving compared to white middle class students.
