The problem with the functionalists’ theory on education is that a pupil could do well in their education and receive all A’s, but this does not prove that they have done well in learning how to survive in society unless they have completed and received a degree. Which leads onto the problem with social classes; poorer social classes cannot afford to send their children to university to receive a degree, so this creates the gap between middle, upper class and the poorer classes. The whole foundation of the meritocratic idea of society, is that children are supposed to start at the same level in education and work their way up and depending on how hard they work, then they will do well in society, but after all, this idea seems unrealistic given the huge divide between class and unfortunate or fortunate backgrounds of students. However a part from the functionalist’s theory there is also the Marxist theory in education.
Marxists believe that the education system is completely corrupt as it has no intention on helping the poor and working class. They believe that the education system mirrors the system of employment in which oppresses the poor and working class, this belief is proven as you can make a clear distinction with the hierarchy in education; head teachers, deputy head, head of year, teachers and then students. This is a mirrored effect of the employment system; vice president, C.E.O, regional manager, manager, managers assistant, supervisor, supervisors assistant, team leaders, workers. What Marxists have pointed out is that it is a system that is used on a child from a very young age, of people above them telling them what to do.
Marxists theories that the middle and upper class benefit more from education than the lower classes do because the national curriculum is designed to suit the richer. This has a great impact on the lower classes, not being able to support their children through education because they can’t afford to pay for books and equipment to help their children learn.
Karl Marx believed that people that make up the ruling class are determined by how ‘educated’ they are and by how much ‘common sense’ they have, people that can ideologies a system for the lower classes to follow, the lower class people are not accepted as people who have enough ‘common sense’ to be ‘thinkers’.
"the class which is the dominant material force in society is at the same time its dominant intellectual force" (Marx 1964,78)
Most of the time society can see that the majority of working class people are more likely to take on vocational education and go into a career that is based on their physical being and not mental being. Society can definitely see that the middle class community are people who go for careers that are ‘thinking’ careers for example working as a lawyer, to be a lawyer the majority of your time would be to ‘think’ and express your knowledge of the law.
The problem with the Marxists theory on education is that it is not realistic in terms of modern society. Life as we know it, from the beginning of time communities have had leaders of groups, villages, towns, even countries, from hunters to witch doctors, people have always played their different part in their society. So the Marxist theory would not completely work as a whole, unless the worlds so called ‘civilisation’ were to change dramatically and we would also have to change our state of mentality and way of living our everyday lives.
Society in the U.K has been living by the meritocratic system since the tri- partite system failed and was abolished by parliament and Margaret Thatcher came into power. This in itself has affected social mobility, which has created a huge impact on a person’s social status prospects in future and potential opportunities.
The link between social class, social mobility and opportunity is that opportunity does not pass often for the poor and working class, but the richer seem to encounter much more opportunity, creating a social ladder for them and opening a door into social mobility. The government have set up funds of billions of pounds in order to help social mobility in the past decade, but has helped the richer rather than the poor.
‘Last year only 35% of pupils eligible for free school meals obtained five or more A* to C GCSE grades, compared with 63% of pupils from wealthier backgrounds.’ (Jessica Sheperd – 2009)
According to the statistics on (Britain is Less Socially Mobile Than Other Countries) the U.K‘s social mobility rate is lower than the majority of the other European countries.
Margaret Thatcher grabbed hold of parliament’s power by 1979 and brought the worst inequality to Great Britain by 1980. Cuts had been made, unemployment was spreading quickly, by this the rich were becoming richer and the poor were becoming poorer. We are now seeing the effects of the conservative party in today’s economy and especially the education system. They have tended to stick to a functionalist regime in society and a meritocratic order in education.
‘Between the early 80s and the late 90s, the proportion of poorer children who graduate from university has risen by only 3%, compared to 26% from wealthier families, the report says.’(Sheperd 2009)
Statistics (Inequality rose quickly in the 1980’s and has not fallen since) prove that there were less poor class people graduating and more middle and upper class students graduating. Social mobility is so much easier when you have more opportunities given to you. So the wealthier you are, the more you are likely to have opportunity. That doesn’t seem to be fair if the whole theory of meritocracy is so everyone has an equal chance in the education they receive.
There is no simple structure to modern education in the society we live in today, especially in the multi-cultural society of today’s Great Britain and because of this there are many failures in the meritocratic education system; this is linked to the differences of social class, gender and ethnicity.
When it comes to gender, the problem is that girls and boys both learn in different ways, but are both taught in one way in schools. The issue about gender and education is that, up until very recently; educational departments were reluctant to push students in the direction of subjects that were studied by the opposite sex. Until the 1980’s, males were outperforming females according to statistics (Pupils achieving five or more GCSE grades A*-C or equivalent: by sex), but was said to have been difficult to pin point evidence to show that females were under achieving. Since 1990, statistics have shown clearly that females tend to over achieve compared to males in education. This is also a similar problem when revising the situation of ethnicity, with gender and ethnicity, girls still tend to do better than boys.
Once again, because of the functionalist theory that has been practiced in society, social class seems to be the reason of ethnic failures and successes. It must be a difficult situation if a student was not from a wealthy family and English is not their first language. The majority of these students tend to fail in the in British educational system (Race and Exam Success); this is due to the fact that British education is not catered to these ethnic minority groups. What is happening now that the majority of these students are failing, they are being hauled into carrying on their ‘education’ in vocational courses.
New vocationalism is designed for ‘failed’ students to ‘help’ them to get into the workforce, and to give them experience of working. On the other hand New Vocationalism is also designed to help the ‘economy’ by taking in cheap labour and not providing the students with meaningful training.
Rounding up this information, education has shown that it is a key to employment in one respect, but is also a functionalist system of jurisdiction amongst the youth of our society. Till this day, the majority of A-level students have tended to be from a white middle class background, helping them to go onto university, and then a middle class job. This proves how unequal the education system in the U.K is.
Bibliography
Websites:
Date posted: 20/08/2008 Time: 12:38 By: Archana Narayan
Date: 16/01/2011 Time: 17:39
Date: 19/01/2011 Time: 14:06
Date posted: 26/11/2009 Time: 9:30
Date: 19/01/2011 Time: 12: 15
Books:
Reading Matter: Multidisciplinary Perspective on Material Culture
By Arthur Asa Berger 1992
Articles:
The Guardian: Social Class Still Determines Success
By Jessica Sheperd
Date: 12/01/2009
Statistics:
