Functionalism, Social Class and Education
One of the foundering fathers of sociology, Emile Durkheim (1858-1917) was influenced by functionalism and focused on the how complex societies are categorised by differentiation and specialism (O’Byrne, 2011). His approach as a functionalist – the study of society and the way its institutions connect together and change (Giddens, 2006). Society or the social system works like a human known as organic analogy (Moore et al, 2008). In other words, social institutions such as the family, the education system, the political system, etc, contribute to the way society is run. So social order is maintained by the collective consensus with society, whereby we have shared norms and values to help us bond with society (Durkheim, 1858).
According to Parsons (1959), the family prepares children for later life but education (schools) prepares children for the world of work. Functionalists argue that schools transmit the shared norms and values within society. The school steer pupils in the direct of finding their roles within society. This can be dependent on social and cultural interactions, which define who people are. This can be shown in social class (Giddens 2009). According to Durkheim, education’s purpose is:
According to Parsons (1959), the family prepares children for later life but education (schools) prepares children for the world of work. Functionalists argue that schools transmit the shared norms and values within society. The school steer pupils in the direct of finding their roles within society. This can be dependent on social and cultural interactions, which define who people are. This can be shown in social class (Giddens 2009). According to Durkheim, education’s purpose is:
![Picture](/uploads/2/6/7/1/26710109/8257686.jpg?95)
“Education is a continuous effort to impose on the child ways of seeing, feeling, and acting which he could not have arrived at spontaneously. From the very first hours of his life, we compel him to eat, drink, and sleep at regular hours; we constrain him to cleanliness, calmness, and obedience; later we exert pressure upon him in order that he may learn proper consideration for others, respect for customs and conventions, the need for work, etc… the aim of education is, precisely, the socialization of the human being”
(Durkheim, (1982 [1895]), p.6)
Therefore, Barton and Walker (1978) would suggest that the school curriculum needs to change along with the changes in society as the curriculum is a part of the ‘common collective culture’. Teachers are moral role models and ensure peoples are away of their role in society as some may fall out of the system (NEETs – Not in Education, Employment or Training) (Haringey, 2008).
For functionalists’, it may suggest that reasons to why there is an educational attainment gap between social classes, is by the status we are born into. Ascribed status, is where you are born into a more advantage (financially) family, so success come naturally, whereas achieved status comes about through hard work and gaining social mobility (Moore et al, 2008). Therefore, education can provide people with equal chances to work hard to be rewarded (meritocracy). However, conflict theory Marxists would argue that a meritocracy is a myth. According to O’Byrne (2011), social classes have a clear definition; Marxists see class as in relation to means of production. You are either the workers or owners, which shows how dominant ideology in the capitalist system shapes the rest of society. Therefore, education is used as a tool of oppression to maintain class division of the proletariat (working class) and the bourgeoisie (middle class) (O’Byrne, 2011). According to Bowles and Gintis (1976), this is done through what they call the hidden curriculum, so pupils are exploited to except their fate and the position they are in for the work role they are taught to do.
For functionalists’, it may suggest that reasons to why there is an educational attainment gap between social classes, is by the status we are born into. Ascribed status, is where you are born into a more advantage (financially) family, so success come naturally, whereas achieved status comes about through hard work and gaining social mobility (Moore et al, 2008). Therefore, education can provide people with equal chances to work hard to be rewarded (meritocracy). However, conflict theory Marxists would argue that a meritocracy is a myth. According to O’Byrne (2011), social classes have a clear definition; Marxists see class as in relation to means of production. You are either the workers or owners, which shows how dominant ideology in the capitalist system shapes the rest of society. Therefore, education is used as a tool of oppression to maintain class division of the proletariat (working class) and the bourgeoisie (middle class) (O’Byrne, 2011). According to Bowles and Gintis (1976), this is done through what they call the hidden curriculum, so pupils are exploited to except their fate and the position they are in for the work role they are taught to do.