would like to investigate it the achievement of middle class students obtaining their GCSE is a direct result of parental interest and contribution
Rationale I would like to investigate it the achievement of middle class students obtaining their GCSE is a direct result of parental interest and contribution. The hypothesis I am going to research is ''Middle class pupils, in Manchester Secondary schools, who achieve at GCSE, is a result of a high level of parental interest'' I will be using the theory Liberal functionalism to focus on the amount of interest parents give towards their children's schoolwork as this concentrates on the impact of home factors on a pupil's achievement. My reasons for conducting this study is because whilst doing my GCSE's I had a great deal of encouragement from my parents and achieved good high grades. This associates with the work of Douglas, who stated, 'High parental interest is closely linked to high attainment at GCSE level'. In order to test my hypothesis I will have the following aims: . To define the key terms of 'Social Class' and 'Parental Interest' 2. To study the difference in grades between working and middle class students at GCSE level 3. To test my hypothesis by a review of Secondary contextual sources and through my own questionnaire survey. Objectives: . I expect to find that there is still a dramatic difference in GCSE results favouring the middle classes. 2. To show that parental participation and involvement is a key factor of pupils achieving their
" ... We can see Anna as either a deeply liberating, and liberated figure, or as an equally deeply imprisoned and repressed figure."
" ... We can see Anna as either a deeply liberating, and liberated figure, or as an equally deeply imprisoned and repressed figure." Anna Karenina, Tolstoy's masterpiece, exposes the heroine through different lights in different sections of the novel. From the outside looking in, Anna is viewed as a liberated figure. This occurs before we are allowed to explore her character to a greater extent, where it is then noted that she is indeed not without flaw. Her jealousy eventually overtakes her mindset and she becomes imprisoned by her thoughts. When we are first introduced to Anna's character, she seems just as perfect as she is described by the other characters of the novel: beautiful, kind, and liberated. She is classified unique, in a class all her own. She is commended for saving Oblonsky and Dolly's relationship. As the storyline progresses, we see that Anna's ways of life are somewhat dictated by society. She is polite and her grandeur impresses all those who she meets, but upon meeting Vronsky, her emotions pull through much more strongly. After starting her affair with Vronsky, her personality did change, it may even be noted that she became more of an individual, and less a victim of Russian code of society of a woman. It became known to most of her society that she was having an sexual relations with a man other than her husband as she was seen with Vronsky on
"A Discourse on Inequality" .
Submitted By: Denis Venderov Submitted To: Professor D.S. Hutchinson Co-Instructor: Paul Los T.A. Janette Dinishak Course: PHL 102Y Date Due: February 13, 2003 Position Paper #5 Assigned Reading: Jean-Jacques Rousseau. "A Discourse on Inequality" (part II). Corruption among mankind. One of the leading political philosophers of his time, Jean-Jacques Rousseau presents in his work, "A Discourse on the Origin of Inequality", concepts that are original not only in terms of political theory, but economical and social theories as well. Through obtaining a fictitious state of nature, Rousseau's Second Discourse leads to suggestion that man is inevitably corrupt as a result of natural and moral inequalities. "The first man who, having enclosed a piece of ground, bethought himself of saying this is mine, and found people simple enough to believe him, was the real founder of civil society. From how many crimes, wars and murders, from how many horrors and misfortunes might not any one have saved mankind, by pulling up the stakes, or filling up the ditch, and crying to his fellows, "Beware of listening to this impostor; you are lost, if you once forget that the fruits of the earth belong to us all, and the earth itself to nobody."1 With these powerful words, Rousseau begins the second part of the Second Discourse. Having previously argued that the state
"Are gender roles changing or being reinforced"?
Introduction In answer to the question, "Are gender roles changing or being reinforced"? I would definitely say yes. My reason for this supposition is from the information gained from the account of work and women in the middle ages that can be seen in the historical background. In researching this topic, I got most of the information from the book, the changing role of women. I also found a bit of information from the internet, more precisely www.askjeeves.co.uk. Some terms and definitions I found during the itinerary of this coursework are the difference between sex ad gender and socialisation. Sociologists use the term sex to describe the biological state of being male or female. For example, male humans have xy chromosomes whereas female humans have xx chromosomes. This should not be confused with gender, which means the way in which males and females behave. The way in which we learn how to behave as male and female is called socialisation. In this essay, I will attempt to establish whether or not gender roles are changing or being reinforced. Historical background During the course of the century, the work of men and women has changed. The aim of this historical background is to provide a detailed account of the work of men and women in the middle ages, the industrial revolution, the Second World War and today. I will start by giving a brief summary of the
"As researchers are also members of society it is impossible for them to be objective and value free in planning and conducting their research." To what extent do sociological arguments and evidence support this view?
"As researchers are also members of society it is impossible for them to be objective and value free in planning and conducting their research." To what extent do sociological arguments and evidence support this view? AS defined by Robert Bierstedt 'objectivity means that the conclusions arrived at as the result of inquiry and investigation are independent of the race, colour, religion, creed, occupation, nationality, moral preference and political predisposition of the investigator. If his research is truly objective, it is independent of any subjective elements, any personal desires that he may have.' The term value free means that the research is objective, therefore unbiased. In this essay, I am going to be assessing different viewpoints and trying to establish whether or not sociological research can ever be objective and value free. The methodological approach, anti-positivists, think that sociological research can never be objective and value free. They advocate the use of qualitative (data presented in words) methods. They try to explain the world in terms of individual meanings and motives and so take a micro (small-scale) approach. They believe that sociology cannot be scientific because it is subjective (biased). Therefore, they believe that sociological research cannot be value free. Contemporary sociologists, who support the methods used by anti-positivists,
"Assess the different sociological accounts of the role and functions of Religious institutions in contemporary society"
Sociology Essay "Assess the different sociological accounts of the role and functions of Religious institutions in contemporary society" The question has long been asked, is there a place left for religion in the modern world. A world where people place more importance on the success of their football team than in their spirituality. Indeed many would argue that any functions that Religion had in previous decades and centuries have been outdated or replaced. However, there have been many arguments put forward highlighting the role and function of religion in contemporary society. The first of these is put forward by the Functionalists. The Functionalists would argue that religions most important functions are the transfer of social solidarity, value consensus and promoting harmony and integration. In Emile Durkheim's Elementary Forms Of Religious Life, published in 1912, he examined Religions role in promoting social solidarity through what he called the 'collective worship of society'. He believed that this collective worship was religions most important function. It promoted faith in common values, helped people to understand and express the moral bonds which united them. Durkheim took as an example, aboriginal society. He argued that the aborigines worshipped their society as a whole through a system of beliefs and practices in relation to specific totems. He believed
"Commitment to Family life is dying"
Level 3 Sociology "Commitment to Family life is dying" To discuss the statement "Commitment to family life is dying" and to accurately evaluate whether this statement is accurate, it is essential to first illustrate what 'family life is' and how different sociological perspectives perceive what a family is. How the family is made up, what role the family plays in a wider community and whether this institution still exists in this context and still has influence over society. If so, whether that influence is beneficial or detrimental. Functionalists see the family as the most essential institution within a society, providing every thing an individual needs to contribute effectively to that society. The notion that the family unit and every member of that unit works in harmony with a society is taken as fact, especially the view that the nuclear family is the prevalent family structure and plays the most effective role in stabilising individuals. Talcott Parsons describes the family as retaining two 'basic and irreductable functions' which are common to every family in every society and culture. The first is the 'Primary socialisation of children' and the second, the 'stabilisation of the adult personalities of the population of the society'. What Parsons means by this is that the family firstly reproduces providing more members of a society to fill the roles needed for
"Comparison of Rousseau's view of liberty with that of Mill's".
"Comparison of Rousseau's view of liberty with that of Mill's" In his book The Social Contract, Rousseau thinks that what makes man free is the change from a state of nature to the civil society. However, in Mill's On Liberty, he thinks society is in fact threatening the individual, rather than providing freedom for it and it should be limited in order to protect the individual freedom. As can be seen from these two opposing views, Mill's and Rousseau's view of liberty differ from each other. This paper will explain these differences between their views of liberty. Their views about the role of the individual will make the first comparison. Here is what Rousseau says about the role of the individual: "Each of us puts his person and all his power in common under the supreme direction of the general will; and in a body we receive each member as an indivisible part of the whole." 1 What can be understood from this sentence is that Rousseau is denying the role of individuality in society, since individuality threatens the maintenance of the whole and it is against the basic principle idea of the social contract. According to him, only the sovereign can decide what is a concern of the community. Rousseau's most extreme example of it is in his discussion about the right to life or death. In this example, Rousseau says that if a man, under the control of the sovereign, has agreed
"Describe what is meant by gender role socialisation and examine its relevance for an understanding of contemporary society"
(Page, 1) Mohammed Emamy 19/11/02 "Describe what is meant by gender role socialisation and examine its relevance for an understanding of contemporary society" Gender role socialisation is one of the most pervading and overlooked features in our lives. Gender by definition refers to the cultural and social influences that define feminine or masculine roles in society. As opposed to sex which refers to biological differences between male and female. The differences between the two forms of reference are also reflected in sociological theories in which there are three main groups. Firstly the Biological determinism approach which is based on the theory that the main social differences between males and females are caused by biological differences. Secondly the cultural or socialisation approach, which explains gender differences such as gender roles, related behaviour and attitudes as the product of cultural socialisation. That is to say our social and cultural environment shapes our gender. For instance a girl may have a firm acceptance of her self as female and still not adopt all of the behaviours her culture considers feminine or avoid all behaviour labelled masculine. The third approach is referred to as the integrated approach. It is integrated in that it draws on both biology and culture.
"Discuss the claim that Religion is in decline in modern British society."
Sociology of Religion "Discuss the claim that Religion is in decline in modern British society." For centuries now sociologists and great intellectuals have been prophesising the end of religion and yet it remains a huge focal point in society even today. However, although religion remains prominent in society, it no longer holds the same enigma it once did. People no longer practice their religion with passion, this however does not mean that society has no religious beliefs; a lot of people claim to believe in God, however not practice religious beliefs. Grace Davies, author of "Religion in Britain since 1945" described the English as "believing without belonging" - this shows that society still has beliefs, however chooses not to practice them to the extent others once did. Evidence supporting a decline in religion emerged in the results of a survey on religion completed by 415 respondents from KGV College in 2004. The data collected showed that 62% of respondents never attended church regularly and 66% of respondents disagreed with the statement "Religion makes life better". These results somewhat match national statistics, only 33% of the British population actually consider Religion to be important and 17% of the population responded that religion was one of the most significant factors in their lives. Peoples own experience, parents, education and friends
