Functionalists also believe that schools act as ‘society in miniature’ preparing individuals for life in the wider society, for example in school pupils are encouraged to work as a team this would help in the wider society since we live in a democracy. Durkheim sensed that social rules should be enforced in schools (school rules) in order to allow students to develop self-discipline, fearing that misbehaviour could spoil the interests of the social group, for example, we are taught to respect and follow the school rules in school as a result we will accept the law as adults. According to Durkheim, education teaches individual skills necessary for future occupations. This is a most important function in advanced industrial society with its complex division of labour.
Talcott Parsons (1961) argued that education is like a bridge between the Family and wider society, preparing us for our adult roles. This bridge is essential because the family and society operate on different ideology; therefore, children need to learn a new way of living if they are to survive in later life. In the family we are judged by the particularistic standards, rules that apply only to a particular child, for example the younger a child is the more they are able to get away with bad behaviour. On the other hand, we are all judged the same in schools and the society, we are judged in terms of achieved status and universalistic values. For example in school, you get good exam grades if you work hard. Similarly, in the wider society you get status for doing voluntary work or if you have a high status job such as an MP. This is what is known as meritocracy. Parsons perceives schools as preparing an individual the move from the family to the wider society for the reason that school and wider society are both based on meritocratic values. These values are very important as they ensure that the best people fill the most important positions and that people of all levels accept their position, as they know everyone had the same opportunity to succeed at school.
Davis and Moore (1945) came up with the theory “role allocation”; allocating us jobs according to our skills and abilities. They believe that social inequality keeps the economy going ensuring that the most talented people fill the most important roles. Education therefore sifts and sorts and grades people in terms of ability, which is rewarded in exam success, those with the most ability, are then rewarded in society in terms of economic rewards to ensure the best people fill the most functionally important roles.
Blau and Otis (1978) equally argue that our modern economy depends on using its “human capital”, it workers skill, in order to flourish. They put across the idea that a meritocratic education system does this best, since it enables each person to be allocated the most suitable job. The economy depends on strong skills produced by competition.
Functionalist says we are all equal, it may well be that qualified status such as sex, race, class is a more important factor in educational success and that the meritocratic principles of the education system may be beliefs to legitimate actual inequalities in society that the education system helps to reproduce. Tumin (1953) asks ‘how do we know what makes a good job? Because it’s highly rewarded? Why some jobs are more highly rewarded than others? Because they are more important!’ The ruling class make decisions as to what jobs are most important. They can reward those doing the ‘most important jobs as they choose.’ For example a pop star may be exceptionally well paid, does this therefore mean that this job is functionally more important for society than that of a nurse or a teacher or even a road sweeper?
Wrong (1961) argues that Functionalist see us as ‘puppets’. Instead, we should be aware of how pupils can rebel against a school value. Do examinations really grade pupils in terms of ability and ensure that the 'best' people fill the most important jobs? It could be argued that exams only test pupil's ability to remember and regurgitate facts and have very little to do with ability in any other areas.
Where as, Functionalist view society as based on agreement and union, Marxist see society based on conflict; specially class conflict. Marxist put across the argument that society is divided into two social classes; “the bourgeoisie” also known as the ruling class who own the means of production such as factories, raw materials and so on. On the other hand, “the proletariat” also known as the subject class who own nothing but their own labour which they have to sell to the ruling class in order to survive. Karl Marx saw society based on the exploitation of one large class (proletariat) by a small group (bourgeoisie), producing inequalities of wealth and power in society.
Althusser (1971) argues that schools mould children into subjects to fit the requirements of capitalism. At school children learn submission, respect, respect for work and their place within it. In summary schools work to meet the needs of the workforce and ensure that the labour force is technically competent. The education system is designed to make the subject class accept the beliefs and values of the ruling class; making them think that it is fair and justified. Also and most importantly education provides an ideology that legitimates the inequalities of Capitalist society. The capitalist class must exercise control over education. Functionalists argue that schools operate meritocratically, however Althusser argues that this is merely ideology that makes people believe that the education system is fair when really it serves the interests of the ruling class because they control the education system. In school we are socialised into believing that schools operate on meritocratic principles, this ideology pacifies us and we do not see that the education system is really unfair and serves to reproduce the inequalities of society and the relations of production that benefit the capitalist class.
Bowles and Gintis (1976) argue that achievement in school and a pupil's life chances are determined to a great extent by their family background, their class. Schooling takes place in the form it does in order to effectively prepare pupils for their future role as workers under capitalism. This preparation is achieved through the ‘hidden curriculum.’ They also argue that the hidden curriculum closely mirrors many features of the workplace. For example pupils do what they are told by the teachers, same way the employee does what the employer tells him to do.
Bowles and Gintis also argue that the educations system furthermore helps to preserve and justify the system of social inequality in capitalist societies. It helps the subject class come to terms with their position in society, creating the idea of ‘false consciousnesses.’ Therefore, Bowles and Gintis eliminate the idea of Davis and Moore that social class inequalities occur from reasonable amount of competition.