Sociologists have different perspectives on education in society.
Functionalists agree that societies are hierarchical that the most intelligent people will rise to the top and fill the most demanding roles in society. Also, that institutions such as education will educate people so that they will fit in the correct occupational role. Differential attainment is the difference of performance in education. Some sociological explanations of why some social groups underachieve in education focus on; class, gender and ethnicity. Both functionalists and Marxists agree that secondary socialisation, economic role and selection allocation are the three main functions of education and hidden curriculum. Durkheim argued that school makes someone feel that they have social solidarity.
…show more content…
Talcott Parsons said that education spreads common values to the next generation which is value consensus and social order. Also, he said that education is a bridge between family and wider society, this can promote values such as achievement, individualism, competition and equality of opportunity. The concept of meritocracy is the concept of shared values and common goals. People that do well are those that conform to these values and goals. People accept that those at the top of society will increase power, stats, large incomes and rewards. Inequality in terms of pay and status in society is necessary as it motivates individuals to aim to the most important jobs in society. High status, rewards, power reward people for length of time they have spent in education (Lane, 2016). However, this perspective has some criticisms such as elite groups can create barriers for others and prevent entry into some professions. Also, Stratification can prevent motivation which means that if a person is poorly educated then they are less likely to be motivated to succeed. Functionalism does not deal with the negative aspects of social