Emile Durkheim agrees with this idea believing that shared norms and values create social solidarity. This involves a commitment to society, a sense of belonging and a feeling that the social unit is more important to the individual. But from an interactionalist viewpoint how can so many different individuals all have the same types of norms and values. Especially, when according to functionalism, these are a continuation of norms and values created from home life. So if this were correct every family would have the same norms and values that every school would then continue. However with so many different cultures, life experiences and beliefs every family and school could not transmit the same norms and values. Especially considering things such as geographical place or even size of family.
Parsons also claims that school establishes universalistic standards in terms of which pupils achieve their status. Conduct and achievement can be measured so that status is achieved on the basis of merit. Every pupil can be equally measured regardless of sex, race, religion etc. This meritocratic idea means that student’s education is based on achievement rather than ascription.
However, perhaps education is still not based on meritocratic principles. Private and grammar schools could be argued to have an advantage to state schools. If parents can pay for a school with fewer pupils in classes and the opportunity for a wider variety of subject options this must be considered better than state schools. However, it could be argued that many higher and richer classes do not want private education for their children as they wan them to achieve their status and not just inherit it. Another argument is just because a child goes to a private school this does not necessarily mean they will be better behaved. Well-educated individuals are not always committed to conformity, perhaps the opposite when considering anarchism.
Also, even within schools their may be banding or streaming, so this must mean pupils do not have equal opportunity. If a child is put into the wrong band or stream their intelligence may not be able to flourish, or perhaps if the lower bands or streams have un behaved students this may rub off to the pupil in the wrong band or stream. Or if a pupil is put into a band or stream to difficult for them they may feel negative as they struggle with the work, or perhaps are to embarrassed to ask for help if everybody else understands. On the other hand the positive influence may encourage the individual to work harder. This is the functionalist idea of a self-fulfilling prophecy, so that a student could start to believe, and make possible situations that they thought not possible for them.
Functionalist approaches accept that in education students should be graded and take exams. This would mean the people with the most talent would get the best grades and therefore jobs. However, it could be argued that all exams do is test pupil’s ability to remember and regurgitate facts spoon-fed to them from teachers. Where as pupil’s ability in other areas such as effort towards education cannot really be tested. As students can put a lot of effort into education, but not be naturally very bright. So even if lots of effort is made a pupil may no necessarily do very well in examinations and will not get the better jobs. So the idea if students work hard they will achieve the best jobs is not strictly true. Also, Marxists Bowles and Gintis found that students that were creative and independent tended to get lower grades, which would mean these qualities being overlooked. So students that were punctual and dependable would be teachers favourites just because the creative and independent students did not like the way in which there education and work is organised.
Kingsley Davis and Wilbert E. Moore believe that social stratification ensures the most talented members of society are allocated to the best jobs. This in theory means that these jobs will be the ones people compete for and that the most talented will win through. In opposition to this the relationship between academic talent and occupational reward is not very close. For example, income and educational attainment. Everyday society relies on the emergency services, such as the police, ambulance and hospitals and fire brigade. These occupations save lives every day but do not receive the highest salary; men kicking balls around a field get paid far more than these lifesavers do. So according to Davis and Moore this would be a more important job than a lifesaver.
The functionalist theory claims that education today is very fair and provides equal opportunities for everyone. We are told that education is a meritocracy. However, it could be argued that ascribed status such as sex, race and class is more of an important factor than is described. The idea of a meritocratic education system could be an ideology to legitimise inequalities in society that education helps to continue to reproduce. Marxists would claim that education is not a meritocracy because the more well off can afford private tutors with one on one attention, where as if you cannot afford this the people with tutors will be better educated. Also, money would come into education when some families cannot spend time helping their children, as they have to work so much, so children could miss out on reading with a parent or extra curricular activities, for example not having the time or money to visit a museum
Durkheim argued that teaching of subjects such as history helps to create a society that everyone feels they are a part of and so should contribute to. This continues the idea on social solidarity as the individual feels part of a group. However, it has been argued that the history we are taught is one mainly that would fit white middle class students. In schools it is English history that is taught, even though in many schools lots of different people form different cultures or religions attend a school.
As a modern and industrial country we are in need for an increasingly skilled workforce. Some functionalists claim that this is met by the educational system. However it is very hard to find direct links between may school subjects and the world of work. Although now perhaps this problem is being solved by qualifications of GNVQ’s, however not many options are offered to pupils unless they are willing to travel to larger and perhaps less local schools and colleges.
Role allocation is described as finding the appropriate person and their talents for the jobs to best suit them. However, a person may be wrongly judged, or perhaps have not had the best chance at education but when given a good chance may be able to do a better job. From an interactonalist view point perhaps the person had problems in their personal life so could have achieved better in exams. Feminists would claim that girls would be allocated too less important jobs because of male domination. As boys are stereotyped as being stronger, and girls being followers and boys leaders. This is then followed into the workplace, as some employers may see men as more reliable as cannot get pregnant, are stereotyped as less caring do bring no emotional baggage into work and if a child is ill typically it would be thought of the female taking time off of work to look after them.
Functionalism does not take into the consideration the lives of individuals. They do not take into consideration geographical differences, upbringing, beliefs, and experiences. They judge things in a very general and wide scale way. In doing so things found by the interactionalist approach would never be known. Such as the effect a teacher can have on pupils. Also, functionalists do not discuss sexism still goes on in education. They do not recognise the generalisations, gendered language roles and stereotypes.
However, on the other hand not every individual can be examined and a bad exam result could not just be excused as a pupil was having a bad day. To examine education statistics do have to be taken into account but perhaps other causes could be noticed as well.
In the study of education through a functionalist theory some key weaknesses can be noted. Such as the norms and values being transmitted may be those of the elites and ruling class, and the debate on whether education is actually meritocratic, also that so much of what functionalists believe is based on exams and that today status is achieved and not ascribed. However, many of these arguments could be found true either way so there are no clear-cut answers.
The functionalist theory takes into consideration themes that other perspectives do not. Such as that perhaps some people would like jobs that are considered of lower status and that not everyone can be a high achiever. From the Marxists point of view everyone should be equal, but this is impossible. The inevitability some will always be better than others is recognised by functionalist theory.
Perhaps functionalists do pay a little too much attention to what education can do in general, but the fact that on the whole education does fulfil its role is an indication that theories of functionalism, such as role allocation must be a contributing factor.
