Examining the role of education- Functionalism and the New Right:
by
polarbearjs (student)
Examining the role of education- Functionalism and the New Right:
Item A:
- Explain what is meant by ‘upwardly mobile’. [2 marks]
Being ‘upwardly mobile’ can relate to either a person or a social group whereby they are moving or aspiring to move to a superior social class or to a position of elevated status and/ or power, usually in a job.
- Suggest 3 criticisms of ‘new vocationalism’. [6 marks]
The main function of new vocationalism is to provide the economy with a skilled workforce. However, one of the criticisms relates to the Marxist view upon the topic. They argue that its authentic function is serving the needs of capitalism at the expense of young people by reproducing existing inequalities. Phil Cohen (1984) argued that Youth Training Schemes (a course related to new vocationalism), serves capitalism by teaching young workers not genuine job skills but instead attitudes and values needed in a subordinate labour force. This makes young people more likely to accept low paid jobs as well as lowering their aspirations.
Rob Strathdee (2003) also conveyed a Marxist response to the situation. He concluded that the Vocational Education and Training policy had not supplied a ‘high-wage/ high-skill society’ but instead it continued to reproduce inequality by compelling both ethnic minority and working class students onto courses which would ultimately result in low paid and low status jobs. This was while middle- class students largely opted for the academic courses which would lead to better job prospects.
Likewise, Carol Buswell (1987) also criticised the ‘new vocationalism’ stating that the Youth Training Systems funnelled girls into the traditional low paid ‘women jobs’ such as retail work. This meant that even if some girls had the ability and intelligence to do other jobs involving the need for more high skilled employees, their aspirations may have in fact been modified due to this scheme.
- Outline the New Right view on education. [12 marks]
The New Right takes a conservative political perspective. One of their central principles is that the state cannot meet people’s needs and that people are best left to meet their own needs though free market. This therefore links with their view of favouring the marketisation of education. They believe that education can only perform its role effectively if it is organised on market principles. Chubb and Moe (1990) are American, New Right theorists who argued that American state education has failed and they make the case for opening it up to market forces of supply and demand. They reached this conclusion after a comparison of the academic performance of students from low income families from both public and private schools, and have attributed the better performance of private school students to structural differences between the two types of school. Their evidence shows that pupils from low income families consistently do about 5% better in private schools. The fundamental issue here was that Chubb and Moe wanted to introduce a market into state education where schools would receive guaranteed funding not taking into account how good or bad their academic status was. They decided to propose a system whereby families would be given a voucher to spend on educational aspects on a school of their choice. This would make sure that schools pay more attention to the families wishes regarding their child’s education as this voucher would account for the prime source of the school’s income. This therefore concludes that education is being seen almost like a private business for the New Right theorists, as schools have to compete in the same way to attract ‘customers’ (parents), by improving their ‘services’ (educational standards).
