Key Contributions To The Sociological Debates Sociology Essay Essay

essay B

Get Full Essay

Get access to this section to get all the help you need with your essay and educational goals.

Get Access

This essay will analyze and measure the cardinal parts to sociological arguments in relation to instruction, such as why some people do better than others and how they are recognised and rewarded in society ( Haralambos, Holburn, 2008 ) . To make this the essay will first measure Functionalism, Marxism and Interactionism. It will so foreground any similarities and differences. Finally some decisions will be drawn.

Functionalism is a consensus theory that looks at society in its entireness and holds the position that the constructions within society each have a peculiar map and work in unison. Consequently behaviour is influenced as a consequence of the constructions ( Haralambos, Holburn, 2008 ) .

Functionalists value instruction greatly and claim it plays a critical function in the socialization procedure as it teaches kids the necessary accomplishments and values they require in maturity ( Haralambos, Holburn, 2008 ) . Talcott Parsons claimed that to hold a successfully functioning society this shared value was critical ( Taylor, et Al, 1995 ) .

Furthermore, Functionalists believe instruction provides equal chances and those that achieve higher consequences than others have done so as a consequence of their ain ability. Therefore the instruction system works on a meritocratic footing. This enables persons to continue into the work force with a function suited to their specific academic ability. Consequently Individuals who have achieved higher consequences than others will be recognised by their place in society which their wage will reflect ( Owens, No day of the month ) .

A strength of the Functionalist position is that it emphasises the thought that kids should be taught at a degree important to their capablenesss. As a consequence this thought has helped determine the instruction system today ( Muhammad, 2009 ) . Besides it helps transfuse a sense of individuality and makes people feel they belong to society ( No writer, no day of the month ) .

In footings of failings, Functionalists argue that life in a meritocracy provides equal chances nevertheless grounds shows that persons who are taught in private really frequently achieve higher consequences. This lone serves to foreground that inequality exists ( Taylor, et Al, 1995 ) .

There are many surveies that support this position. For illustration the Equality of Educational Opportunity. This was conducted by James Coleman in 1966. Coleman was asked to bring forth a study with the purpose of foregrounding educational equalities. Coleman sampled over one hundred and 50 pupils. Coleman concluded that the support given towards schools bares small correlativity with pupil success. It besides showed that holding both white and black pupils sharing a category benefited the “ socially deprived black pupils ” , ( Coleman, 1966, cited in Wikipedia, No day of the month, pg 1 ) . This was reflected in their consequences.

There are many strengths and failing of this survey nevertheless.

First the survey helped to supply a existent elaborate penetration into the survey of instruction. As a consequence this led to dramatic alterations, such as the “ execution of integration busing systems ” ( Coleman, 1966 cited in Wikipedia, No day of the month, pg 1 ) . It besides helps to raise consciousness of racial inequality non merely within instruction but within society.

The failings associated to such a survey is that it came out at a clip when racial tenseness was high and such a study merely served to rise the tenseness farther ( Coleman, 1966 cited in Wikipedia, No day of the month ) .

Now traveling on to Marxism, this position is recognised as being really influential in Sociology and was founded by Karl Marx ( Haralambos, Holburn, 2008 ) .This is a construction theory but is one of struggle non consensus. This struggle occurs as a consequence of life in a society driven by net income and the battle for power between different groups coexisting within society.

As Marxism believes that category creates struggle within society it holds a pessimistic position of the instruction system. It believes that the instruction system merely serves to foster quash the working category by working them through supplying fewer privileges. However this development is masked so as to non upset societal stableness ( Taylor, et Al, 1995 ) .

As Haralambos and Holburn ( 2008, p.602 ) point out “ instruction mostly serves the involvements of the powerful as it maintains their power, justifies their privileges and legitimizes their wealth ” . Marxists, Bowles and Gintis claimed that an instruction system that exists within a net income driven society is driven by the duplicate of labour domination and that there is a really close correlativity that exists within the work force and the instruction system. Therefore it merely serves the demand of those who hold control over it, the Bourgeoisie.

A strength of within the Marxist position is that it highlighted the being of inequality within the instruction system, which has led to assorted sums of research been conducted. It has besides helped to foreground other less obvious facets associated with instruction, by discoursing the concealed course of study.

There are a figure of failings nevertheless. For illustration, it places more accent on the being of the constructions to direct behavior than the existent behavior of the persons within the instruction system. Consequently it has been argued that Marxists merely view humanity as “ animals of the societal system, ” ( Taylor, et Al, 1995, pg. 289 ) .

The survey based on Marxism developed by Bowles and Gintis is called Schooling in Capitalist America. Please note much of the findings, and rating has been incorporated into the old subdivision. The thought behind this survey was to set up the degree of inequality that exists within the instruction system as a consequence of a net income driven society. They surveyed over two 100 and 30 senior pupils. The consequences demonstrated that classs were non rewarded on virtue but on 1s personality. This merely highlighted the inequalities in being within the instruction system. Furthermore they claimed that the workplace is shaped through the usage of the concealed course of study.

Finally, The Social Action perspectives believes that it is non the constructions that influence society but the persons. As each society is influenced by the picks persons make, protagonists of this position see facets of conformance as a movable guideline unfastened to reading ( Haralambos & A ; Holburn, 2008 ) .

Derived from the Action theory is Interactionism. This position focuses the micro degree interaction. Interactionists are interested in ego construct, and the significances which determine action ( Taylor, et Al, 1995 ) .

As Interactionists focus on the micro degree interaction and are interested in ego construct, and the significances which determine actions ( Taylor, et Al, 1995 ) they are interested in the interaction which occurs in a schoolroom puting with instructors, equals, the schoolroom scene. It is this interaction that shapes the image one holds of themselves which is correlated with the degree of accomplishment. Cardinal to the interactionists view is “ the manner in which instructors makes sense of and react to the behavior of their students ” ( Haralambos and Holburn, 2008, pg 638 ) .

David Hargreaves, Stephen Hester and Frank Mellor believed there was a high opportunity of one ‘s self image being damaged if they are negatively type casted by instructors. As a consequence of a survey they conducted they found three phases of typing or sorting. The guess, amplification and stabilization phase. They found that negatively type casting can hold a damaging consequence on the ego constructs of the kids as if they are thought of as aberrant disputing this perceptual experience will turn out really ambitious ( Hargreave, Hester, Mellor, 2007, cited in Haralambos, Holburn, 2008 ) .

Consequently one time this label is attached it is likely that this individual will mime the label they are tarred with. Thus it becomes a ego carry throughing prognostication. The same thought can be used when instructors view certain students as being more capable or intelligent that others. Should this go on so instructors interaction and behavior with most likely emulate this to which the person to the full begins to encompass the impression besides. Therefore, it has become a self fulfilling prognostication ( Haralambos and Holburn, 2008 ) .

Banding in Beechside comprehensive by Stephen Ball is a survey used to back up this position. Ball introduced a system of banding to first twelvemonth pupils. There were three sets of hierarchy and each student was allocated a set based on the recommendations from their old primary instructor. However Bell discovered when finding the sets academic ability was non the exclusive beginning. Bell found that the other factors such as the parent ‘s business had an impact in the determination. Furthermore Bell found that bit by bit the kids reverted to the properties expected of their set. The ground for this, he claims, is due to the instructor ‘s attitudes reflecting the properties of the stria, and therefore their interaction with the kids, matched this. Consequently Bell concluded that accomplishment is closely linked to banding ( Haralambos and Holburn, 2008 ) .

The strengths associated with this survey are as follow. Throughout schooling banding allows persons of a higher capableness to larn with others of a important degree. Thus they will non be held back and can be allowed to boom academically. It can besides see positively as it can actuate others into working harder to come on up the stria degrees.

However there are besides many failings. For illustration, by segregating kids into a set so they are turn puting a label of the kid ‘s caput. This label is one that is hard to change as others alter their behavior to fit this. Consequently this will impact the consequences gained. Besides one time a label is cast the person will move harmonizing to it. Thus it serves as a ego carry throughing prognostication ( Taylor, et Al, 1995 ) .

When looking at similarities and differences between the three theories there are huge sums of differences but merely one similarity. Which is they are all sociological theories ( Class notes, 2011 ) .

However the Functionalist and Marxist approaches both portion several similarities in that they both look at the overall construction to explicate instruction. They are besides similar because they both look at instruction from a macro position instead than a micro position. They agree that instruction serves as a platform for which persons learn accomplishments that will enable them to populate in an unequal society ( No day of the month, no twelvemonth ) .

Some of the differences between the two are as follows. As Functionalism is a consensus theory it claims that the constructions work together and that everything within society has a map. Consequently instruction is seen as positive and benefits society as through the formal and informal acquisition that instruction provides societies shared values strengthens societies. Another difference is that Functionalism supports the impression of a meritocratic society where virtue and wages are given based on accomplishment and are reflected ( No writer, no day of the month ) .

The interactionist ‘s theory differs from both Functionalism and Marxism as it is derived from the societal action theory which means that it is the behavior of persons that influence society non the constructions within it. Besides they view social constructs such as norms, values and functions as movable guidelines instead than functioning as a design for society. However the most obvious difference is that they focus on micro flat interaction and are interested in ego construct, and the significances which determine and influence actions ( Taylor, et Al, 1995 ) .

In decision, while I see strengths in the Functionalists statement, such as it playing a critical function in the socialization procedure. I believe it to be outdated and is unreasonable to believe that everyone has an equal opportunity when private instruction exists and merely those that have a grade of wealth have the chance to go to. This lone highlights the inequality. While there are besides strengths I see within the Marxist point of view, such as the being of inequalities in instruction. I disagree that the instruction system merely serves to foster quash the working category by working them through supplying fewer privileges. I believe that this is far excessively misanthropic a position and differ the on the job category are unwittingly being socialised into the values of the upper category.

Consequently the theory I prefer is the Interactions position. While I can see flaws, such as non looking at society as a whole. I agree wholly that the interaction that takes topographic point when in instruction is critically of import in assisting to determine persons behaviour, and therefore their application to instruction. The Banding in Beechside comprehensive school survey besides serves to repeat this point farther. I besides agree with the points they hold on labelling and it taking to a ego carry throughing prognostication.

Get instant access to
all materials

Become a Member