Marxist Theory versus Functionalism - Essay Example

Marxist Theory versus Functionalism in Regard to Educational Achievement College: Part One Introduction Sociologist approaches the view of social to education based on two frameworks. To the functionalist, consensus approach is used to study education and relate its impacts to the society and to Marxism, conflict approach is used. Sociologist will agree on whatever observable variables in the society but dissent in terms of the interpretation of the meaning of the observations (Webb, Westergaard, Trobe & Steel 2008, p. 105). Both functionalism and Marxism theories look at schooling from what is termed as ‘outside’ perspective and link educational systems to societal outcomes. The two theories are in unison agreement that schooling socializes learners into the societal prevailing values and norms. Sociologist are concerned with the need to maintain or refurbish the existing societal norms and values driven by distinguishing statements of facts and values. The resolution on whether to maintain the status quo depends on personal understanding and perspective of the current societal norms and values. In this essay therefore, I will compare and contrast Marxism and Functionalism view of education based on similarities and difference. Body According to Functionalism, “The consensus approach”, institutions of learning are probed to uncover their societal responsibilities and roles. They believe that an institution exist in a society for a particular reason. Assumption by the Functionalist is that some societal needs are served by the educational institutions. Functionalist focus on the positive packages educational institutions renders ensuring sustainability of society. On the other hand, Marxism’s ‘The Conflict Approach’ education is part of societal superstructure. The education (superstructure) is viewed as the vital supportive part of economic organization of the society. Education is therefore, responsible for economic arrangement of the society structure with respect to possession of capital and wealth and the establishment of social classes. In consensus with Functionalist view on education, Marxist recognizes the contribution of education to economic organization and functioning of industrial society. Marxist contradicts and criticizes the Functionalist societal capitalist organization and hence disapproves Functionalist education in its current framework. According to Functionalism, socialization is founded strongly on education. To industrial society, education avails avenues for instilling knowledge necessary to produce specialist institutions. These specialists institutions aid in distinguishing between societal individuals by delegating distinct levels of economic activities. Besides, educational institutions provide platforms necessary for interactions and hence establishment of social networks amongst societal new members. Functionalist thus attaches educational institutions as the vessel to socialize general population into deeply-rooted societal values, beliefs and culture. On similar manner, educational institutions aid in identifying and ranking individuals to particular educational levels in the society. Functionalist thumps education help meet the system needs through ensuring that all learners basically commit themselves to the societal values and beliefs. This function of education is regarded by Marxism as “Hidden Curriculum.” Social solidarity is thus enhance through transmission of societal norms and values amongst the students (Moore, Aiken, Chapman & Langley 2010, p. 87). Functionalist classification of individuals based on distinct ranks enables societal needs to be met as skills are matched to needs and simultaneously support societal economic needs. From the Marxism point of view, schooling is described as “Ideological State Apparatus.” Reasonable and just situations drive learners to do their work in a cooperative manner. Economic relations structure education reproduce economic relations. Education form a key component of labor power reproduction systems (Moore, Aiken and Chapman 2008, p.56). Student who fail in schools are not attributable to systems failures but rather the failure of whatever the objective designed to be achieved. Marxist attaches school dropout, failure amongst students and alien school finding as signs to a successful school system workability. On the other hand, Functionalism’s meritocracy is more of genetics than culture. Schools are impartial and neutral screening gadgets. Functionalists hold that education systems automatically and independently selects genius students. These students are ranked in higher levels of education. Conclusion In conclusion, Functionalists linkage of school to societal systematic needs is workable. School are knowledge, norms and values transmitters automatically select genius learners. Structural perspective is rational approach as it goes beyond individual school and classroom analysis (Browne 2009, p. 143). Marxism view is thumped up for unearthing that student reject being tagged negative and showcase how school is shaped by interest of dominant and powerful cohort. The two theories help us unearth the hidden agendum of Schooling. Part Two 1: Importance of Primary Socialization The children future societal conduct and behavior is strongly embedded on the caregivers and parents primary socialization. Children must learn the societal fundamental norms, beliefs, values and overarching cultural practices to behave morally in the future. Satisfaction of children’s physical needs is essential in ensuring they are properly modelled to be future responsible societal figures. It is evident amongst children who lack primary social to poorly perform at adulthood. Therefore, primary socialization ensures moral adulthood. 2. Difference between a macro and a micro approach in sociology Micro approach is concerned with individual and their interactions whereas Macro approach is pegged at social, structures, processes and challenges and their interactions. With respect to Normative Perspective, Macro approach is significant as it focuses on societal rules and statutes which are responsible for societal social order. These social controls are missing in Micro approach. Whereas Macro approach is driven by Normative Perspective, Micro level is embedded on Interpretive Perspective and deals with ongoing issues in social world based on social interactions. Determines daily relationships amongst interactive individuals. Macro-level limits individual’s ability to act and override constraints of social structures. 3. Hidden Curriculum It is normal educational curriculum supplement. It is a side-show knowledge which transmits societal values, norms, cultural practices, principle implicitly learned by students. It promotes social-orders control within school and societal levels. The ‘Hidden Curriculum’ establishes obedience, coercion and obedience and help individual appreciate social inequalities as just and correct. 4. Cultural capital According to Bourdieu, individual’s social class is embedded on his capital ownership. Capital determines individuals’ rank in the social ladder. Individual’s power escalates with social capital’s possession. To cultural realm, capital is a conglomeration of individual’s symbolic elements; taste, credentials and material belongings an individual obtains in particular social classes. Reference Webb, R., Westergaard, H., Trobe, K., Steel, L. (2008). AS Level Sociology, Brentwood: Napier Press. Browne, K. (2009). An Introduction to Sociology. 3rd edition, Cambridge: Policy Press. Moore, S., Aiken, D., and Chapman (2008).Sociology AS for AQA. London: Collins Joseph Rowntree Moore, S., Aiken, D., Chapman & Langley, P. (. 2010) Sociology AS for OCR. London. Collins Read More