Explain How Far Some Sociologists Agree That The Main Feature Of Education

Gabija Barkute, 10C/F3

How far do Sociologists agree that the main feature of education is to socialise pupils for their future roles?

The debate outlined above suggests that some Sociologists (such as Functionalists) believe that socialisation is the key feature of education. The term socialisation refers to the process of learning culture, which is the way of life of a society- this can include learning language, customs, fashions etc… However, other sociologists (such as Maxists and Radical Feminists) may argue with this statement due to belief that the wealthy/men dominate education and have it benefit them. To address this matter, I will be looking at both sides of the argument and assess how far sociologists would agree with this statement.

Functionalism, a consensus theory, states that education benefits everybody and is a meritocracy- this means that it is fair and those whom succeed do so because they work hard, not because they are male and/or wealthy. Functionalists claim that education contributes to secondary socialisation (the second stage of socialisation that is carried out through peers, education, work…) which teaches them important norms and values- helping to maintain order in society. For example, education teaches pupils the importance of working hard in school as this will lead to better grades, better grades mean you can get places at better universities and later go on to get better jobs than those who don’t work hard. This means education prepares pupils to work hard in the world of work as, if they do, it will lead to positive sanctions- such as a promotion at work. Another reason why they may agree with the statement is because the curriculum teaches pupils the importance of following the law and rules and that, if not, it can lead to negative sanctions such as being sent to prison. This means that pupils are taught to be obedient and good members of society- helping to maintain order and preparing them for the future world of work, where they are likely to have a

Maxists would disagree with this statement as they believe that the wealthy control education and use it benefit themselves by keeping the rich rich and the poor poor (otherwise known as Social Class Reproduction). For example, the wealthy have the money to afford private schools and, after attending private schools and getting the best grades, they can then go to the top universities and go on to get the top jobs. Also, the poor can suffer due to material deprivation- meaning they may not be able to: afford to live in a good catchment area, hence they can't go to better schools; eat at school so they are very tired and can’t concentrate; afford transport to get to school. Finally, Maxists would disagree with the statement outlined above as they claim that, through the Hidden Curriculum (things pupils are taught in terms of behaviour and discipline), the wealthy learn to rule and the poor learn to be ruled. For example, the poor are taught to be hard-working and obediant which prepares them to be ruled by their bosses- the wealthy. Similarly, Radical Feminists would disagree with the statement. Radical Feminists believe that education is patriarchal (male dominated) and that it canalises (prepares) boys and girls into traditional gender roles. For example, encourages men to go into engineering and other similar jobs, whereas women can be housewives, nurses etc…