EDUCATIONAL IMPLICATIONS OF
VARIOUS SOCIOLOGICAL CONCEPTS
Estanislao
M. Mejia
Structural functionalist
theory originated with the contributions of Emile Durkheim, who emphasized the
need for individuals to share similar values to maintain cohesive society.
Conflict theory, which grew out of the work of Karl Marx and Max Weber focuses
on the struggle of social classes to maintain dominance and power in social
systems. The interaction theory attempts to understand the deeper meanings
individuals give to their participation in and relationships with schools. The
interactionist theory has its origin in the work of George Mead and Charles
Cooley. One of the most influential interactionist theorists was sociologist
Erving Goffman. There are also several recent theories that, although grounded
in these earlier frameworks, provide important explanations that bridge the gap
between macro- and micro level theories; Berstein’ code theory, Bourdieu’s
description of cultural capital and Collin’s work on status competition.
Sociological Concepts
|
Educational
Implications
|
Functionalism
|
Education serves several functions for society.
These include (a) socialization, (b) social integration, (c) social
placement, and (d) social and cultural innovation. Latent functions include
child care, the establishment of peer relationships, and lowering
unemployment by keeping high school students out of the full-time labor
force. Problems in the educational institution harm society because all these
functions cannot be completely fulfilled.
|
Conflict theory
|
Education promotes social inequality through the
use of tracking and standardized testing and the impact of its “hidden
curriculum.” Schools differ widely in their funding and learning conditions,
and this type of inequality leads to learning disparities that reinforce
social inequality.
|
Symbolic interactionism
|
This perspective focuses on social interaction in
the classroom, on the playground, and in other school venues. Specific
research finds that social interaction in schools affects the development of
gender roles and that teachers’ expectations of pupils’ intellectual abilities
affect how much pupils learn. Certain educational problems have their basis
in social interaction and expectations.
|
Functionalism
1.Functional
theory stresses the functions that education serves in fulfilling a society’s
various needs. Perhaps the most important function of education is
socialization. If children are to learn the norms, values, and skills they need
to function in society, then education is a primary vehicle for such learning.
Schools teach the three Rs (reading, ’riting, ’rithmetic), as we all know, but
they also teach many of the society’s norms and values.
2.second
function of education is social integration. For a society to work,
functionalists say, people must subscribe to a common set of beliefs and
values. As we saw, the development of such common views was a goal of the
system of free, compulsory education that developed in the nineteenth century.
3. third
function of education is social placement. Beginning in grade school, students
are identified by teachers and other school officials either as bright and
motivated or as less bright and even educationally challenged. Depending on how
they are identified, children are taught at the level that is thought to suit
them best. In this way, they are presumably prepared for their later station in
life.
4. Social and
cultural innovation is a fourth function of education. Our scientists cannot
make important scientific discoveries and our artists and thinkers cannot come
up with great works of art, poetry, and prose unless they have first been
educated in the many subjects they need to know for their chosen path.
For education to
serve its many functions, various kinds of reforms are needed to make our
schools and the process of education as effective as possible.
Conflict
theory
Conflict theory
does not dispute the functions just described. However, it does give some of
them a different slant by emphasizing how education also perpetuates social
inequality. One example of this process involves the function of social
placement. When most schools begin tracking their students in grade school, the
students thought by their teachers to be bright are placed in the faster tracks
(especially in reading and arithmetic), while the slower students are placed in
the slower tracks; in high school, three common tracks are the college track,
vocational track, and general track.
Such tracking
does have its advantages; it helps ensure that bright students learn as much as
their abilities allow them, and it helps ensure that slower students are not taught
over their heads.
Conflict
theorists say that tracking also helps perpetuate social inequality by locking
students into faster and lower tracks. Worse yet, several studies show that
students’ social class and race and ethnicity affect the track into which they
are placed, even though their intellectual abilities and potential should be
the only things that matter: White, middle-class students are more likely to be
tracked “up,” while poorer students and students of color are more likely to be
tracked “down.” Once they are tracked, students learn more if they are tracked
up and less if they are tracked down. The latter tend to lose self-esteem and
begin to think they have little academic ability and thus do worse in school
because they were tracked down.
In this way,
tracking is thought to be good for those tracked up and bad for those tracked
down. Conflict theorists thus say that tracking perpetuates social inequality
based on social class and race and ethnicity
Conflict
theorists add that standardized tests are culturally biased and thus also help
perpetuate social inequality
Conflict theory
involves the quality of schools. Schools are unequal, and their very inequality
helps perpetuate inequality in the larger society. Children going to the worst
schools in urban areas face many more obstacles to their learning than those
going to well-funded schools in suburban areas. Their lack of learning helps
ensure they remain trapped in poverty and its related problems.
Conflict
theorists say that schooling teaches a hidden curriculum, by which they mean a
set of values and beliefs that support the status quo, including the existing
social hierarchy. Although no one plots this behind closed doors, our
schoolchildren learn patriotic values and respect for authority from the books
they read and from various classroom activities.
Symbolic
Interactionism
Symbolic
interactionist studies of education examine social interaction in the
classroom, on the playground, and in other school venues. These studies help us
understand what happens in the schools themselves, but they also help us
understand how what occurs in school is relevant for the larger society. Some
studies, for example, show how children’s playground activities reinforce
gender-role socialization. Girls tend to play more cooperative games, while
boys play more competitive sports.
Another
body of research shows that teachers’ views about students can affect how much
the students learn. When teachers think students are smart, they tend to spend
more time with these students, to call on them, and to praise them when they
give the right answer. Not surprisingly, these students learn more because of
their teachers’ behavior. But when teachers think students are less bright,
they tend to spend less time with these students and to act in a way that leads
them to learn less. Robert Rosenthal and Lenore Jacobson (1968)Rosenthal, R.,
& Jacobson, L. (1968). Pygmalion in the classroom. New York, NY:
Holt. conducted a classic study of this phenomenon. They tested a group of
students at the beginning of the school year and told their teachers which
students were bright and which were not. They then tested the students again at
the end of the school year. Not surprisingly, the bright students had learned
more during the year than the less bright ones. But it turned out that the
researchers had randomly decided which students would be designated bright and
less bright. Because the “bright” students learned more during the school year
without actually being brighter at the beginning, their teachers’ behavior must
have been the reason. In fact, their teachers did spend more time with them and
praised them more often than was true for the “less bright” students. This
process helps us understand why tracking is bad for the students tracked down.
Other
research in the symbolic interactionist tradition focuses on how teachers treat
girls and boys. Many studies find that teachers call on and praise boys more
often (Jones & Dindia, 2004).Jones, S. M., & Dindia, K. (2004). A
meta-analystic perspective on sex equity in the classroom. Review of
Educational Research, 74, 443–471. Teachers do not do this consciously, but
their behavior nonetheless sends an implicit message to girls that math and
science are not for them and that they are not suited to do well in these
subjects. This body of research has stimulated efforts to educate teachers
about the ways in which they may unwittingly send these messages and about
strategies they could use to promote greater interest and achievement by girls
in math and science (Battey, Kafai, Nixon, & Kao, 2007).Battey, D., Kafai,
Y., Nixon, A. S., & Kao, L. L. (2007). Professional development for
teachers on gender equity in the sciences: Initiating the conversation. Teachers
College Record, 109(1), 221–243.
Summary:
According to the
functional perspective, education helps socialize children and prepare them for
their eventual entrance into the larger society as adults.
The conflict
perspective emphasizes that education reinforces inequality in the larger
society.
The symbolic
interactionist perspective focuses on social interaction in the classroom, on
school playgrounds, and at other school-related venues. Social interaction
contributes to gender-role socialization, and teachers’ expectations may affect
their students’ performance.
References:
Chetty et al., 2011; Schanzenbach, 2006Chetty, R., Friedman, J. N., Hilger, N., Saez, E., Schanzenbach,
D. W., & Yagan, D. (2011). How does your kindergarten classroom affect
your earnings?
Evidence from Project STAR. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 126, 1593–1660; Schanzenbach, D. W. (2006).
What have researchers learned from Project STAR? (Harris School Working
Paper—Series 06.06).
JAMK,
Teacher Education College, Jyväskylä, Finland
Wotherspoon, Sociological
Theories of Education, pdf
Lawrence J.
Saha, Sociology of Education, Australian National University, pdf
Nathalie
Bulle, SOCIOLOGY AND EDUCATION, Is
No comments:
Post a Comment