• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Critically Evaluate the Functionalist Perspective on Education

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Critically Evaluate the Functionalist Perspective on Education For the Functionalists, education performs a positive function for all individuals in society and has a powerful influence over it. The education system serves the needs of an industrial society by providing a more advanced division of labour; socialising new generations into societies shared norms and values and, according to meritocratic criteria, allocates roles in. Education supposedly meets societies through three related economic roles; socialisation; allocation and vocational training. Firstly, Durkheim and Parsons (1956-9) stated that the education system involves the transmission of socially agreed norms and values, known as the 'Value Consensus', to future generations. This was done through both the 'formal' curriculum and the 'hidden' curriculum, and its economic role is referred to as socialisation or social control. The formal curriculum is more commonly known as the National Curriculum and so is thus the timetabled lessons the state lays out for students to undertake. However, the hidden curriculum teaches such moral lessons as the reward and punishment system, by which students must conform to and obey more authoritative persons (teachers), and installs a sense of work ethic, like punctuality and co-operation. Functionalist theorists believe that this internalisation of norms and values results in social cohesion and stability, as well as ensuring a continuity and order in society. ...read more.

Middle

The main ides of Classical Marxism are that education benefits the ruling-class and not society as a whole, and that as part of a super-structure education reproduces and legitimises social inequality. Also they believe strongly in the 'Myth of Meritocracy', which they believe does not provide real equality of opportunity as the functionalists claim, as via selection, such as setting in to ability groups, the working-class are separated from the middle-class. In 1972 Althusser argued that the socialisation role does not transmit shared values, instead it is part of an ideological state apparatus set up to create a sense of false consciousness. This is the institution of the belief that capitalism is fair, natural and inevitable, and that alternatives are impractical, and leads to that acknowledgement of this inequality in the working-class. Through this education serves the needs of capitalism, not society as the functionalists believe, by socialising children into the dominant ideology - the ruling-class norms and values - leading to an obedient workforce and the stability of capitalism. Althusser claims that, like the Functionalists, social norms and values are endorsed through both the formal and hidden curriculum. Marxists feel the exclusion of subjects like sociology and peace studies from the national curriculum leads to narrow-minded views of society set by the ruling-classes, of what they believe too be the 'shared' norms and values. ...read more.

Conclusion

Hargreaves study in 1967 found that pupils labelled troublemakers reacted by developing an 'anti-school subculture' in which they achieved status by reversing mainstream school values, so that 'bad becomes good'. In doing this they go against the Functionalist view that the hidden curriculum teaches students to accept hierarchy. However, like the Functionalists these views can be too deterministic by assuming negative labelling always leads to a self-fulfilling prophecy, as it can have an opposite effect like in the case of Afro-Caribbean schoolgirls. Also, it ignores the impact of material and cultural factors outside school and other factors inside school that are beyond the teachers' control, such as class sizes and resources. Therefore the theory helps to draw attention to some factors inside school, which explain working-class under achievement although a full explanation would also look at structural explanations as the Functionalists have. Finally, in evaluation I feel that although the Functionalist approach to education appears slightly patchy in areas and may no fully put evidence to explanations, the Marxist, Interactionist and other criticising theories also fail to cover all areas of the matter. Therefore, although quite deterministic in it's failure to recognise the formation of the students identity and the effects of education that are not functional to society, it is similar to other theories in its lack of scope and failure to see things from another dimension. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Work & Leisure section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Here's what a teacher thought of this essay

5 star(s)

This is a really strong essay because of the language and terms used throughout but also because of the structure. There is a good balance between the Functionalist view and criticisms. The essay also applies the key studies throughout. Overall grade: *****

Marked by teacher Matthew Wilkin 07/05/2013

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Work & Leisure essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    Comparison Of Marxist And Functionalist Views On Education

    3 star(s)

    The 'hidden curriculum' is taught in all schools but is not something, which is standardized, i.e. like subject exams. But the 'hidden curriculum' can be partly formal, e.g. rules. In all perspectives, schools are seen as social institutions, but these perspectives all have different ideas on how they socialize people and for what reasons.

  2. The Marxist view of education

    Both Bowles and Gintis and Willis provide evidence to hold up their claims. Schools do reward hard work, conformity and obedience. And some students who learn to live with what they see as the boredom of school are prepared for the monotony of low-skill jobs.

  1. Compare and contrast Functionalist and Marxist theories of education

    Unfortunately students who learn to live with what they see as the boredom of school are prepared for the monotony of low-skilled jobs. When analysing these two main approaches to the sociological study of the role education plays in society, although they oppose each other because functionalists emphasise the ways

  2. Compare and contrast the Marxist and Functionalist views on the role of education in ...

    So he believes that social life would be impossible without social solidarity amongst people. Social solidarity is when a mass of individuals in a society is united as a whole, and when people learn to respect their community and look after one another and their surroundings.

  1. The role of education in today's society.

    This system worked through what Parson's called Role allocation. Role allocation sorts pupils in terms of their abilities and talents, directing them towards occupations that would best suit them. For example, a pupil excelling in the sciences would be encouraged towards a profession as a doctor or scientific researcher.

  2. Assess the role of education form the functionalist perspective

    An example of this is in American schools where pupils sing the national anthem and pledge their allegiance to the flag everyday by making tem feel part of the American society. According to functionalists, school is society in miniature, where pupils have to get on with strangers and where they

  1. 'The function of education is to reproduce and legitimate social inequality. Discuss.'

    According to the Marxist Sociologists, Bowles and Gintis (Schooling in Capitalist America, 1976), education will always reinforce and legitimate social inequality. As a consequence of the elite owning the means, they decide what the curriculum entails and therefore continuously reinforce and reproduce their class status as the system is designed by themselves for themselves, leaving the working class powerless.

  2. Assess Functionalist and Marxist approaches to the relationship between education and economy.

    The child moves from particularistic standards to universalistic standards. This is important in an increasingly complex and specialised division of labour. Within the family status is ascribed, whereas in the school status is largely achieved. Schools encourage achieved status and school is also important from moving children from their particularistic and ascribed status to their universalistic and achieved status,

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work